Where did the Canadian army FNs go?

Morpheus32 said:
But by the summer there will be none left in Canada. All have been ordered destroyed. The C5s in storage are now all destroyed as well. We are working to get some saved to be OPFOR weapons but the "system" is not happy with the idea.....

Jeff
Click to expand...

Who in the chain of command would be responsible for issuing such an order?
 
I guess the point I am raisingis that if the asset is in operational condition, then it is not the decsion of the military alone to destroy OUR assets. Taxpayers paid for them. They are the military's to use...but not arbitrarily destroy.
 
Yeah I was just thinking, wouldn't a canuck soldier want a FAL to engage an enemy across a valley with a Fal vs a C7 or C6? You could blow him away at 1000 yards with an accurate scoped FAL couldn't you?
 
gunnoob said:
Yeah I was just thinking, wouldn't a canuck soldier want a FAL to engage an enemy across a valley with a Fal vs a C7 or C6? You could blow him away at 1000 yards with an accurate scoped FAL couldn't you?
Click to expand...

Don't take offense to this but it kind of demonstrates you don't really understand the military. We have snipers with 50 cals, 7.62mm machine guns, 25mm chain guns in the LAVs, 155mm howitzers, close air support and B52s when the going gets tough. I think the 25mm chain gun is the best for long range engagements across the valley particularly at night. Everyone carrying FNs would not make everyone snipers.....

We have plenty of weapons, so no we don't really need the FN overseas. As noted by others, the FN was not a sniper rifle...it just fired a 7.62mm cartridge.

Now why they are destroying the FNs....I could not tell you. I am working to save some as OPFOR weapons...

Jeff
 
Morpheus32 said:
Don't take offense to this but it kind of demonstrates you don't really understand the military. We have snipers with 50 cals, 7.62mm machine guns, 25mm chain guns in the LAVs, 155mm howitzers, close air support and B52s when the going gets tough. I think the 25mm chain gun is the best for long range engagements across the valley particularly at night. Everyone carrying FNs would not make everyone snipers.....

We have plenty of weapons, so no we don't really need the FN overseas. As noted by others, the FN was not a sniper rifle...it just fired a 7.62mm cartridge.

Now why they are destroying the FNs....I could not tell you. I am working to save some as OPFOR weapons...

Jeff
Click to expand...


Thanks bud, I already knew about 25's 52's ect. If you see some ass walking, a fluted barreled FAL would be better than a C7. Right? But I guess Johnny Jihad works enmass. I just think that some guys would want an accurized FAL.
 
I'm sorry, can't you cheaply make a FAL more effective at range than the C7?
.50 BMG? Can't you equip guys with FALS that don't have .338's? Confusing.
 
gunnoob said:
I'm sorry, can't you cheaply make a FAL more effective at range than the C7?
.50 BMG? Can't you equip guys with FALS that don't have .338's? Confusing.
Click to expand...

Its not confusing, I think you are looking at it from a single individual perspective. One guy fighting one guy....it does work that way. We fight in groups, with a number of different weapon systems. Why make the FN do something that we don't need and spend money doing it. We don't have fluted barrels nor are they accurized. In essence, the army weapon suite is basically a system of systems. We have weapons to do different jobs covering off different ranges and situations. The C7 and C8 are doing just fine and do what we need them to do. We fight with the C6 machine gun...it is the real firepower in a platoon before we get to the bigger crew serves.....don't get caught up in the caliber thing.

Jeff
 
Nonetheless, please email Mr. Harper and the Minister of Defence, who knows, maybe they'll stop this madness if enough people email them with our concerns, although it may be a toughsell. I'm thinking it may be possible to sell the idea to the (Conservative) government of holding them in reserve for an unforseen domestic emergency situation, or as a way to arm a 'new' class of volunteer, I'm thinking maybe the Rangers would appreciate having access to them.
 
Last edited:
I think a case could be made for a 'Designated Marksman's Rifle', much like the US Marines and some US Army units are employing the upgraded M14. Unfortunately, as much as I love our old C1A1, it ain't it. Something like the SVD, AR10, or even (heaven forfend) some upgraded M14's (Marstar owns a few thousand real M14's that could be given the treatment).
 
Sure, the way it was set up prior to when it was replaced through SARP, it's not set up as a sniper for sure, from what I heard from one of my instructors in Battleschool, the top cover mount for the Elcan sight was way too flimsy for the requirements of a marksman rifle, DRE whatever could use the work couldn't they, in figuring out how to set up the C1A1 as a marksman rifle accoring to 21st century standards as opposed to 1950's standards. But this is all just talk for sure.
 
... Considering the state of World affairs and the likelihood of further conflicts, that may well spill over onto Canadian soil, I for one, question the wisdom of wantonly destroying any "War Reserve Stocks" . If nothing else, there's the potential, to make them available to emerging, and friendly (for the time being) Third World Military or Police. ..... David K.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom