AR-10 question
- Thread starter Epoxy7
- Start date
- Location
- Vernon, BC
Epoxy7:
I would drop Morpheus32 a line, and see if he can shed any light on the subject.
regards
AbH
I would drop Morpheus32 a line, and see if he can shed any light on the subject.
regards
AbH
- Location
- currently downrange
As far as I know the barrels are stock from Armalite, just modified for suppressor. Badger Ordinance handguards.
The AR-10Ts in service now will be replaced with another small buy for deploying units only confirming what the site below suggests.
http://www .casr.ca/101-rifle-ar10t-mrs.htm
The AR-10Ts in service now will be replaced with another small buy for deploying units only confirming what the site below suggests.
http://www .casr.ca/101-rifle-ar10t-mrs.htm
That site you listed says Nothing.
So the AR-10T is being replaced?? It doesn't say that anywhere.
- Location
- currently downrange
Perhaps I was not clear. The link is just for general info on Canadian Military weapons incl the AR-10T. The site suggests they will likely need to be replaced.
"In the near future the IOR AR-10Ts will need their barrels replaced. This will provide a clue as to the future of the MRS."
I am confirming that the above is true and that the plan is to buy more, thus providing a clue what the future is.... It will be another small buy to replace what has worn out and they will only be on general issue for units on their way overseas.
Armalite site says the barrel is Rifling Twist: RH 1:11.25"
"In the near future the IOR AR-10Ts will need their barrels replaced. This will provide a clue as to the future of the MRS."
I am confirming that the above is true and that the plan is to buy more, thus providing a clue what the future is.... It will be another small buy to replace what has worn out and they will only be on general issue for units on their way overseas.
Armalite site says the barrel is Rifling Twist: RH 1:11.25"
maple_leaf_eh
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
It would be nice to know everything that is going on, but there is a little thing called OPSEC that will naturally get in the way. I'm sure there are hundreds of views of ARs on combatcamera, but because the rifles so closely resemble C7s, they are easily overlooked.
The simple answer is the snipers have 5.56, 7.62, .338LM and .50cal rifles for their work. The mention that the AR's need rebarreling should tell you that the snipers are shooting 2-3-4000 rounds through them. Since the sniper spotters' rifle hasn't been around that long, this should tell you how well the guys like them.
The simple answer is the snipers have 5.56, 7.62, .338LM and .50cal rifles for their work. The mention that the AR's need rebarreling should tell you that the snipers are shooting 2-3-4000 rounds through them. Since the sniper spotters' rifle hasn't been around that long, this should tell you how well the guys like them.
I am afraid all those are true and honest assumptions, but nothing more !
Rebarelling, if really needed could be for another 20 inch tighter polyg. twist with better suppressor mount that just friction ?
Mere assumptions here as well !
KPA
If I may jump in. The AR10s have been in use with the CF for a while now. They are being used for precision engagements and have been very successful. The rifles were purchased as part of an immediate operational requirement. In theory, they are only a temporary fix to a problem while a full purchase with sustainment program is started. Unfortunately, the CF is still debating the use of the 7.62mm rifle with the infantry. To this effect, the decision was made to continue with what we have and purchase additional AR10s. I would expect at some point a further development of a 7.62mm precision platform...but for the immediate future it is an AR10.
I can report it is an AR10T with Badger Ordnance Handguard with the barrel modified to fit a suppressor. Generally it is an AR10T.
Cheers
Jeff
I can report it is an AR10T with Badger Ordnance Handguard with the barrel modified to fit a suppressor. Generally it is an AR10T.
Cheers
Jeff
I've seen that site before. The in combat photo is the real deal. The one they have pictured with the rifle only is a "mock up" version. The barrel on the real thing steps down slightly near the end and is threaded for a suppressor.
1:11.25 twist rate is pretty much what I suspected.
1:11.25 twist rate is pretty much what I suspected.
- Location
- currently downrange
Pretty sure that photo is from high angle live fire training in Texas.
Are they trying to say "fully automatic"?
Interesting to hear the CF is still considering 7.62 vs. 5.56
Are they trying to say "fully automatic"?
Interesting to hear the CF is still considering 7.62 vs. 5.56
You missed understood the point. The CF is not reconsidering the 5.56mm. The AR based system is here to stay in the military. The only question is what platform for the # 2 weapon for snipers. There is some discussion of a "designated marksman" for operational use however, the need has not been proven out on operations. A percieved need vs an actual need. When precision 7.62mm is need, snipers are employed to deal with it.
Don't think for a second that the CF is not happy with the C7/C8 family....actually it is quite the opposite. The rifles have been doing outstanding in combat...
This is the sentence that I misunderstood.
I suppose this whole 'marksman' issue shows that there is no ideal round for general infantry use.
I'd still rather pack the weight of the larger round myself. The 5.56 seems to have a similar killing power to 7.62 if the ballistic tests are to be believed ahead of anecdotal combat reports, but can it punch through obstacles like 7.62mm?
Anyway, that's OT.
This is the sentence that I misunderstood.
I suppose this whole 'marksman' issue shows that there is no ideal round for general infantry use.
I'd still rather pack the weight of the larger round myself. The 5.56 seems to have a similar killing power to 7.62 if the ballistic tests are to be believed ahead of anecdotal combat reports, but can it punch through obstacles like 7.62mm?
Anyway, that's OT.
No worries. I should have explained the sentence better.
Reference the 7.62mm bit. People tend to look at combat like a first person shooter game with you by yourself fighting an enemy. So the biggest and baddest weapons works the best. The reality is much different. In the army, you fight in teams with weapons systems designed to compliment the capablities of each other. There is no universal cartridge nor a universal rifle. Hence the need for a spectrum of capablity. Combat is a dynamic game of chess. We have machine guns in 7.62mm so the range and capablity is covered off. Rifles, as carried by our infantry, are engaging fast moving, and fleeting targets...hence the importance of a red dot and CQB training like the gunfighter program. The further the target is away, the greater number of systems that can engage it. Machine guns win fights.
The problem today is many gun mags and internet experts profess that the AR series are not functioning properly nor capable of killing the enemy...often using scenarios from Vietnam and Somalia. We are a long way from those rifles and ammo. The systems work and do the job. Night fighting and close combat is now the dominate requirement...something a C7/C8 with NVG/PEQ2/PAC4 does very well. Try that with an FN or M14.
It seems like a simple issue but it is not. What you decide to hump for hunting or shooting...bears little nor no relivence to combat. Some people just have difficulty understanding the difference.
When your choice is basically....none. The rifle you use is the best
Well you can look at it any way you like. My point is there are no problems with the rifles and people don't have a problem taking them into harms way. Some people have a perceived issue with the C7/C8. Just telling you that it is not an issue with the troops in combat.
