Gun clips - what sort of gun?

DING!

eeeeermmmmm..... Just to mention that the term 'plod' is used as a term of affection and NOT intended to offend any Police Officers who may read and/or contribute to this group, especially those who I know and tend to forget are, erm, plod... :-)

All 101s were designed and built as gun tractors, but yes, I do know what you mean. The clips I'm referring to can be seen here:

(by the windscreen - please disregard the pipe into the jerrycan...)

I still can't really picture how and gun would actually fit in there, if you see what I mean?

The 101 mortar sections used smgs.

IIRC the more bounty payments were made in the TA when the slr was replaced by the sa80 system.

AJH

I recall an old squaddie referring to the old SLR (7.62mm) versus the SA80 (5.56mm):

'we used to have metal guns that killed the enemy when hit, now we have plastic ones that merely annoy them. . . . .'

By your picture it looks like the right place. Because the SLR trigger hand grip and magazine would be centred between the grips. pointing up so not upset the driver. I remember using the SLR (Can I have tissue) in my old R.A.F. days on exercises doing Tatical Helicopter refuelling. The reason for having them was for safety as most Army(Pongo's) tend to shoot holes in the roof or into the floor....

regards Ex-RAF now Landy90 1984 john.

On or around Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:30:20 -0000, "Hirsty's" enlightened us thusly:

the main reason that the AK-47 or later AKM is the favoured weapon of terrorists/freedom fighters all over the place - it's almost impossible to break it. If you look at (pictures) of 'em, you can see why - bloody huge clearances in the thing, never mind sand, you can get boulders in there, and a very simple mechanism involving string.

On or around Tue, 24 Feb 2004 22:39:22 GMT, SteveG enlightened us thusly:

ah, proper rifles.

in article 403c33b2$0$8564$ snipped-for-privacy@master.news.zetnet.net, John Oakes at snipped-for-privacy@zetnet.co.uk wrote on 25/2/04 5:33:

They look like SLR clips to me, but when we went over to the SA80 we had to use the sanme clips but move them slightly closer together , for why I don't know.

On or around Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:45:14 +0000, Mother enlightened us thusly:

though possibly not as scary as the thing it was towing behind it :-)

most battlefield conditions are short range, no need for 1200 yd accuracy. at extreme range the average grunt needs specialist training and 'stress free' situation to have any hope of a hit. a clip is a gathering together of bullets in a holder ready to charge a magazine. the box below a weapon would be the magazine (container) for the bullets. M16 is a very capable weapon and always was, the intial problems were to do with the myth that it was self cleaning. When trialled in US, special ammunition was used that fired withour very much fouling in the barrel, hence it required no cleaning. In Vietnam the issue was standard ball ammunition that fouled the barrel in the normal fashion and needed cleaning (interesting situation arose at times) once it was realized that cleaning was needed the problem was sorted. spot british special forces in the field by the weapon, usually M16 sometimes H&K. In close quarters MP4//5 as per police on london streets( carbine version, single shot ). SA 80 series does'nt figure anywhere. reason for change to 5.56mm, more ammuntion carried for same weight. Round tumbles upon striking flesh and causes nastier internal damage and better hydrstatic damage within body, centre of gravity is to rear of bullet to aid tumbling ( so much for the rules of war !).

Is Mr. Kalishnikov still alive? He's one of those Russian weapon designers who came out of WW2 with very strong ideas about making stuff that would keep working.

If your vehicle is ex-Royal Artillery and was indeed kitted out for SA80 then you can ignore the SUSAT sight. Long range snipers didn't warrant the expense of an optical sight and had to make do with the fixed iron sight instead.

When was your vehicle demobbed? That'll give us a better chance of deciding what weapon might have been carried.

Regards Steve G

Twas Tue, 24 Feb 2004 22:46:12 +0000 when Steve put finger to keyboard producing:

yep, good one that...

-- Regards. Mark.(AKA, Mr.Nice.) ___________________________________________________________ "To know the character of a man, give him anonymity" - Mr.Nice.

mrniceATmrnice.me.uk 110 CSW 2.5(na)D___________________________________________________________

Twas Tue, 24 Feb 2004 22:31:03 +0000 (UTC) when "Simon Isaacs" put finger to keyboard producing:

I was rather good with it at ranges of up to 1500 yards...

was never going to be able to replace the GPMG now was it, 5.56? 28 round magazine? bloody stupid idea.

-- Regards. Mark.(AKA, Mr.Nice.) ___________________________________________________________ "To know the character of a man, give him anonymity" - Mr.Nice.

mrniceATmrnice.me.uk 110 CSW 2.5(na)D___________________________________________________________

Twas Tue, 24 Feb 2004 22:12:41 GMT when "Exit" put finger to keyboard producing:

Twas Tue, 24 Feb 2004 22:53:05 GMT when SteveG put finger to keyboard producing:

"effective range 400m", I never agreed with these figures. if you are good enough to hit something soft a couple of times at 800m then it'll spoil his day and make yours go smoother. I call that effective.

-- Regards. Mark.(AKA, Mr.Nice.) ___________________________________________________________ "To know the character of a man, give him anonymity" - Mr.Nice.

mrniceATmrnice.me.uk 110 CSW 2.5(na)D___________________________________________________________

Interesting. From just looking at the picture I have doubts that they were originally mounted there ... firstly, they don't line up (one is higher than the other) making it awkward to install and remove the weapon and secondly if a weapon were installed the barrel would prevent the crewman from using his hand grip. Lastly, I don't actually remember seeing any vehicle with the weapon grips mounted just inside the windscreen - it's very bad security (easy for a "smash and grab" thief).

Normally weapons were mounted either horizontally behind the crew at about shoulder height (just above the back of the seat) or vertically in the space between the front seats.

Is there a similar mount on the other side of the cab?

Regards Steve G

IIRC the clips had to be closer together because of the SA80's shorter barrel and stock.

Regards Steve G

Absolutely. I had one guy in my platoon that couldn't hit the walls of a barn if he was stood inside with the SLR but qualified as a first class shot with the SA80 fitted with SUSAT. If he used the iron sight on the SA80 he was back to being useless again.

Fortunately he was a good radio operator so didn't need to get involved with the combat bits too often ;-)

LOL Steve G