Navy Net - Royal Navy Community

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

Typhoon and Apache stories:


War Hero
Two interesting stories on MOD website:

The first justifies the role(and significant expense) of Typhoon in that they seem to have found a role for it at last--replacing the Red Arrows?

The second shows the future of Joint Expeditionary Warfare and the projection of Air Power.

I doubt the RAF see it that way though!!!! :lol:
It's interesting to note that with all this kit that the mod spends copius amounts of our money on, the end user never gets a say!

SA80 ££££££'s spent developing a weapon just to keep Royal Ordinance involved, developing a rifle that cannot share a 5.56 round from erm...our largest battle field ally the yanks armalite's 5.56, the lsw was that a bite? every marine and his dog dropped it for minimi or gpmg, sa89- heavy, loads of working parts and drill looks crap....all this when the weapon of choice was on the shelf, tried tested and proven, our old mate Mr Armalite, as used to this day by SBS, SAS, Brigade Patrol Troop, Pathfinders etc (personally I find Mr AK takes a lot of beating)

Ditto various airframes that are perfectly serviceable straight from the production line, but oh no, some twat has to have modifications that only the British Empire needs (hangars full of new chinooks that don't work 'cos we had to have a digital electronic package installed- not compatible with anything! -ditto problems with LongBow-can't fly/fight in the dark or rain or something, leaves on the line, you know the type of thing)

All that money/time spent on Tornado, just so we have a "euro fighter", it's bloody lunacy when our american cousins have state of the art fighters that $$$'s have been spent on honing to near bloody perfection,available off the shelf.

MIB rubber boats that cox'ns said were an absolute piece of crap from day one, all developed, trialled and bought by the mod when the zodiac was being used by USMC, SEAL, cloggie marines, in fact anyone that knew about amphib ops-hey guess what! after over 10 years struggling with the avon pile of shit the Corps recently binned it in favour of the zodiac the mod could have bought "of the shelf "10 years ago (had they listened to the end users)

Uniforms made in China that fell apart, ships cannibalised to keep sister ships operational, christ if it weren't so tragic it would be Monty Python, the only continuity is the bloody minded singleminded persuit of throwing our money at the pet projects of morons!

The list could easily be added to, it's just a farce, speak to the old and bold from past conflicts, poor old Tommy same shite kit/support and uncle Sam all the gear and....

It's just a damn good job that our unsupported, underpaid and under valued soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines can still pull out the stops and deliver the goods whilst that shower in the big gothic building by the Thames plots to pull the rug from under them. (death by a thousand cuts)
The SA 80 did have end user input in the design stage,at the time the Yanks were having a lot of problems with reliability of their kit....SA 80 was supposed to be better.But as usual the Customer did not know what he wanted and asked for a lot of changes to the original design......the result is what you have today.
Ah...that's ok then, considering that years after development/trials etc when the crappy SA80 was asked to earn it's bread and butter in Op Granby (Desert Storm 1) it needed more care and attention than a new born baby.

Suffice to say that the shed loads of money thrown at it by sending to H+K for the massive A2 upgrade could have purchased the now faultless armalite family ( M203, carbines, demarco variants et al) and still have enough small change to see all of us at an ABBA tribute band concert in Milton Keynes with a fish supper thrown in. As stated the weapon of choice by respected units/individuals for many years.

It's also interesting to note that when Mr Kalashnikov visited Royal Ordinance whilst the SA80 was in production he was shown our work of art by a gushing self satisfied "Proffesor Pat Pending" type, after having it stripped down and giving it the once over, he pondered for a while and said..."you must have very clever soldiers"

'Nuff said!

ps you can bury an AK in the sand, piss on it, brush it down, wipe it with body shop massage oil (nice calm smell when firing) and it will spit 7.62 (short) 'til the cows come home-designed/built in 1947, forgive me if I am less than enthusiastic about our "state of the art" weapon (har har-belly laugh!), more than a few million terrorists can't be wrong.
Initially posted this on a GSSR thread, but on the subject of weapons, saw the ‘Tavor’ on TV the other day. Meant to be the next big thing. Supposed to be as good as an Diemaco in the field plus acurate to a greater distance due to the sight and barrel design, also better for Urban/CQB due to it's length. Take a look: -

Wonder if the MOD will invest?
Shakey said:

Pros - cheap as chips, ultra reliable.

Cons - inaccurate, fires non-NATO round.

Should we tell the americans that our NATO 5.56 is not interchangable with their NATO 5.56! (which one of us has the non NATO round?) should have gone for the Armalite-no question.

As for the AK it's record speaks for itself and has nothing to prove.
Well I have fired the SA 80a2 for real and it has never let me down. Seems lots of people have an opinion on the SA80 based on hearsay or the press. Yes its heavy, however it is very accurate,its reliable (when looked after) it is very flexible and its practible.The AK series is very cheap and requires little effort to maintain. It is however very in-accurate,it overheats (so much so after putting more than 30 rounds threw it in a short time you cannot hold the thing its too hot). The M16/M-4/DIEMARCO are good weapons they must be our SF use them.I ask you, have you seen the UKSF deploy? well when they do they carry around 4 different type of long barrelled weapon each depending on the role for that OP.Of course that is not practicle for the rest of the ''Green Army''.

My input on this thread is based on my and my units experience, all the yanks I have come accross in Iraq love the SA 80 over their own M4. And I am more than happy with SA 80a2.

Moving on to the Tornado,as the BDE FAC on Telic 8 ,I have worked with all A/C used in Iraq, the Tornado GR4 was fantastic,what it lacks in certain aspects it makes up for in allround ability, it was designed during the cold war as a low level tactical strike A/C .It has adapted to its role in Iraq extremely well and whenever I was controlling a pair of GR 4's over Basra it gave all the troops on the ground a ''warm fuzzy feeling'' .It may have the turning circle of a large aircraft carrier with no rudder but it never fails to be effective .

The AH64D Apache (longbow) well this is simple is miles and miles better than the US version.
Deeps said:
Well I have fired the SA 80a2 for real and it has never let me down. Seems lots of people have an opinion on the SA80 based on hearsay or the press. Yes its heavy, however it is very accurate,its reliable (when looked after) it is very flexible and its practible.

Having honestly put thousands of rounds through an L85A2 this year, and not had a single stoppage, I can say that it's a major, major improvement over the A1 version. It may be slightly heavier than most assault rifles, but it's stable, highly accurate and incredibly reliable. The hearsay and misrepresentation carried over from early versions is its only remaining downside.

In fact, in recent trials it came out on-top in categories of reliability and accuracy over that of current US models.

Just such a shame it required such great swathes of time to get there.

Latest Threads