What's new

Why isnt Pakistan Army getting rid of its G3

Status
Not open for further replies.
@ mastan
so exactely that wat i mean to say so we dont have to worry about the range of 7.62 russian rounds
since in reality assulat rifle combat takes place at mat 50-150 meters
so ak47 is much better than a G3
plus remember we are pakistanies we aint exectely desendents from herculise him self
g3 is long and heavy we need a more well suited light weight and easily handled weapon
remember smaller the caliber the more rounds you can carry
fine a 5.45 mm didnt stoped a target on the first round
shoot him with three extra bullets you can carry
and trust me 5.45 is lethal
usuay results in extream bleeding and off course the victum going in to shock
so you guys dont have to worry about stopping power
since the guys goes in to shock i guess you have stopped him

about penetration well
bigger the caliber bigger the penetration
so nothing wins from 7.62

we need a n assulat rifle that has a good range like that of ak74 and m16
and has the brute force and penetration of G3
simplicity and relibility of ak47
and which is accurate like a styer SSG
an assulat rifle that is short lite and diverse
that can do close quaters sniping up to 300 meters and which can aslo be great at CQB like the ak47
 
Ok a quick point. Most contacts come within 300-400 metres not 150. and since the army is going to be set up to face a primarily conventional threat then 90 - 150 metres is almost useless.

I have used several weapons without optics easily up to 500-600 metres. Frankly weapon discipline should be ingrained so any arguments regarding high maintenance is not valid. However the simple truth is that better training will pay more dividends, than spending billions on a rifle system with not enough differences to make it worthwhile. A good well trained infantry soldier can use anything he is given.
In CQB the longer barrel is at a disadvantage but thats why you throw grenades in first. The gun is for mopping up whats left.

The Somalian story is from the whole black hawk down thing and they were using green tip rounds (designed to go through body armour) so thats why they were going though.

Frankly it isn't broken so why fix it?
 
Well nice and details specs about the G3 i think this riffle is still a good one for the troops but may be in future after 5 or some years this will be change with some enchanced or superior version .. which is the best option at that time
 
Ok a quick point. Most contacts come within 300-400 metres not 150. and since the army is going to be set up to face a primarily conventional threat then 90 - 150 metres is almost useless.

I have used several weapons without optics easily up to 500-600 metres. Frankly weapon discipline should be ingrained so any arguments regarding high maintenance is not valid. However the simple truth is that better training will pay more dividends, than spending billions on a rifle system with not enough differences to make it worthwhile. A good well trained infantry soldier can use anything he is given.
In CQB the longer barrel is at a disadvantage but thats why you throw grenades in first. The gun is for mopping up whats left.

The Somalian story is from the whole black hawk down thing and they were using green tip rounds (designed to go through body armour) so thats why they were going though.

Frankly it isn't broken so why fix it?


man in very simple words
pakistan army is engaged in CQB now a days
g3 is not good for it
g3 has a very bad recoil thus its full auto mado is useless(which is very important for CQB
G3 jamms it jamms a lottttttttttt

about traning
well ask any guy who has spend time in PMA
during firing a soilder is more concerned about WHERE THE EMPTY SHELL CASE HAS CALLER RATHER THAN THE TARGET
if you loose an empty shell you in shitt
so how do you expect a simple soilder to be good at shooting
PAKISTAN AMRY give no traning wat so ever in firing while moving and moving back
G3 IS HEAVY
ITS CLUSMY
IT HAS A BAD RECOIL
IT JAMMS
ITS AMMO IS BIG
YOU CANT CARRY A LOT OF BULLETS OF G3
MAKING G3 IS EXPENSIVE
IT ROUNDS MANAFACTURING IS EXPENSIVE
YOU CAN MAKE 2 ROUNDS OF AK74 ON THE MATERIAL OF ONE G3 ROUND
A SOILDER CAN CARRY 400 5.56 ROUNDS WHICH IS EQUIVALENT OF WAT A 150 G3 ROUNDS
KEEPING ALL THESE THINGS IN MIND
G3 ANIT A GOOD WEAPON TO CARRY IN A WAR

and modren wars are about info and MOBILITY
and for mobility you need a weapon which is lite and small but more effective than a g3

and trust me man you must be the best shot in the world to hit an elephand at 500 meters with a g3 FOR GET A MAN
TRUST ME THERE AINT A SOILDER WHO CAN HIT A MAN AT 500 METERS WITH A G3 IN PAKISTAN ARMY
GUESS WHY
YOU CANT REALY SEE A MAN AT 500 METERS
AND TEN MEN STANDING TOGAHTER WIL BE HIDDEN BEHIND THE FRONT SITE NEEDLE OF THE G3 AT 500 METERS


if pakistan realy wants to keep g3 it should make AP rounds for g3
a 30 round mag and fit every g3 with a scope
i should only be deployed in punjab and sind and plan areas
NOT IN MOUNTAIN TERRAIN AND URBAN TERRAIN
 
G-3 dont hurt much. Shoot a single shot in head or center-left of breast. He's hell out of here. THATS WHY WE USE G3.

over n out
 
Oh boy so this is where this thread has gone to now?:lol:

Forget a 7.62x51 round of the G-3, you take a 9mm round in the head and let me know if you survive...:lol:
 
Ok a quick point. Most contacts come within 300-400 metres not 150. and since the army is going to be set up to face a primarily conventional threat then 90 - 150 metres is almost useless.

I have used several weapons without optics easily up to 500-600 metres. Frankly weapon discipline should be ingrained so any arguments regarding high maintenance is not valid. However the simple truth is that better training will pay more dividends, than spending billions on a rifle system with not enough differences to make it worthwhile. A good well trained infantry soldier can use anything he is given.
In CQB the longer barrel is at a disadvantage but thats why you throw grenades in first. The gun is for mopping up whats left.

The Somalian story is from the whole black hawk down thing and they were using green tip rounds (designed to go through body armour) so thats why they were going though.

Frankly it isn't broken so why fix it?

What is PA's opinion about INSAS? Do they regard it as a worthy opponent?
Does PA's have any specific requirement from it's G3, like IA's 3 shot requirement on INSAS?
 
man in very simple words
pakistan army is engaged in CQB now a days
g3 is not good for it
g3 has a very bad recoil thus its full auto mado is useless(which is very important for CQB
G3 jamms it jamms a lottttttttttt

about traning
well ask any guy who has spend time in PMA
during firing a soilder is more concerned about WHERE THE EMPTY SHELL CASE HAS CALLER RATHER THAN THE TARGET
if you loose an empty shell you in shitt
so how do you expect a simple soilder to be good at shooting
PAKISTAN AMRY give no traning wat so ever in firing while moving and moving back
G3 IS HEAVY
ITS CLUSMY
IT HAS A BAD RECOIL
IT JAMMS
ITS AMMO IS BIG
YOU CANT CARRY A LOT OF BULLETS OF G3
MAKING G3 IS EXPENSIVE
IT ROUNDS MANAFACTURING IS EXPENSIVE
YOU CAN MAKE 2 ROUNDS OF AK74 ON THE MATERIAL OF ONE G3 ROUND
A SOILDER CAN CARRY 400 5.56 ROUNDS WHICH IS EQUIVALENT OF WAT A 150 G3 ROUNDS
KEEPING ALL THESE THINGS IN MIND
G3 ANIT A GOOD WEAPON TO CARRY IN A WAR

and modren wars are about info and MOBILITY
and for mobility you need a weapon which is lite and small but more effective than a g3

and trust me man you must be the best shot in the world to hit an elephand at 500 meters with a g3 FOR GET A MAN
TRUST ME THERE AINT A SOILDER WHO CAN HIT A MAN AT 500 METERS WITH A G3 IN PAKISTAN ARMY
GUESS WHY
YOU CANT REALY SEE A MAN AT 500 METERS
AND TEN MEN STANDING TOGAHTER WIL BE HIDDEN BEHIND THE FRONT SITE NEEDLE OF THE G3 AT 500 METERS


if pakistan realy wants to keep g3 it should make AP rounds for g3
a 30 round mag and fit every g3 with a scope
i should only be deployed in punjab and sind and plan areas
NOT IN MOUNTAIN TERRAIN AND URBAN TERRAIN

O.K. this shows a difference in mentality between the amateur and the professional.

1)Just because the PAK army is engaged in CQB now it does not mean that you change weapons. The simple reason is that a army needs the best all round weapon.I could easily use the G-3 in CQB.
2)Full auto is something that is rarely needed on a assault rifle. Why? well because it is inaccurate and wastes ammunition.
3)Guess what.......The British army spends a lot of time clearing empty brass too, your point is invalid.
4)I could EASILY hit a target with this weapon at 500 metres. I don't know where you get this info from. I have the idea that you are a really bad marksman who then blames his weapon. I could hit at 600-700 metres with iron sights with the god awful SA-80 the G-3 would be easier by comparison.


In conclusion i would like to add the words of a weapons expert who wrote the following on his website which i will link.

Germany bought the manufacturing license for CETME rifle and transferred it to the Heckler und Koch (HK) company, located in Oberndorf. HK slightly modified the CETME design, and in 1959 the Bundeswehr (W.Germany Army) finally adopted the CETME / Heckler - Koch rifle as G3 (Gewehr 3 - Rifle, [model] 3). Since that time and until the 1995 the G3 in various modifications served as a general issue shoulder weapon not only for German Armed forces, but also for many other countries. Those include Greece, Iran, Mexico, Norway, Pakistan, Portugal, Sweden, Turkey and many other countries. Total of more than 50 countries during the last 40 years issued the G3 to its forces. The G3 was or still is manufactured in countries like the Greece, Pakistan, Iran, Turkey, Portugal and others. The key reason of high popularity of the G3 is that it is much simpler and cheaper to manufacture, than its major contemporary rivals - Belgian FN FAL and US M14. To the best of my knowledge, the HK itself continued to produce and offer the G3 until the year 2000 or 2001, when it finally disappeared from HK catalogs and web-sites. However, the HK still manufactures a wide variety of firearms, based on the G3 design but of different purposes and calibers, like 9mm MP-5 submachine guns, 5.56mm HK 33 assault rifles, 5.56mm and 7.62mm HK 23 and HK 21 machine guns, PSG1 sniper rifles etc. In general, the HK G3 rifle can be described as one of the best 7.62mm NATO battle / assault rifles - reliable, versatile, controllable, non-expensive and, finally, very popular.

Modern Firearms - Heckler Koch G3 assault rifle


Thank you and good night.......:guns:
 
Oh boy so this is where this thread has gone to now?:lol:

Forget a 7.62x51 round of the G-3, you take a 9mm round in the head and let me know if you survive...:lol:

They'd probably miss..........after all it is very inaccurate:woot:
 
What is PA's opinion about INSAS? Do they regard it as a worthy opponent?
Does PA's have any specific requirement from it's G3, like IA's 3 shot requirement on INSAS?

Can't really comment on the INSAS as I have never fired it or heard much about it. However the three round facility is fairly common. It is simply in order to stop wasteful full auto firing. Which throws off the accuracy as well as wasting ammo.
 
O.K. this shows a difference in mentality between the amateur and the professional.

1)Just because the PAK army is engaged in CQB now it does not mean that you change weapons. The simple reason is that a army needs the best all round weapon.I could easily use the G-3 in CQB.
2)Full auto is something that is rarely needed on a assault rifle. Why? well because it is inaccurate and wastes ammunition.
3)Guess what.......The British army spends a lot of time clearing empty brass too, your point is invalid.
4)I could EASILY hit a target with this weapon at 500 metres. I don't know where you get this info from. I have the idea that you are a really bad marksman who then blames his weapon. I could hit at 600-700 metres with iron sights with the god awful SA-80 the G-3 would be easier by comparison.




Thank you and good night.......:guns:


answer to your reason number one
well just because pakistan army is engaged in CQB and is getting a lot of losses does mean that it should switch to a weapon that is good at both CQB as well as longer ranges

reaseon number 2) well ya but i am sure that when a wazir or a masud tribes man fires his ak47 from 80 meters with a truck load of pakistan army men not a lot of ammo goes to waste


reason number 3) well i am sure they dont go after everyy single brass shell and i am sure there first concern is gettnig the soilder to hit the target


'''' could EASILY hit a target with this weapon at 500 metres. I don't know where you get this info from. I have the idea that you are a really bad marksman who then blames his weapon. I could hit at 600-700 metres with iron sights with the god awful SA-80 the G-3 would be easier by comparison''''


realy how come you see a target at 500 meters
i am sure tommro when you at war you wil be able to spot you enemy in cammo hidden five hundreed meters away
pheraps Allah has blessed you with THERMAL vision that you can spot out a target at 500 meters
man grow up you can brag to any person who has never held a weapon in his hand but dont tell me that you can easily shoot targets at five hundreed meters with a g3
the rear metal sight of a g3 is market up to 300 meters only
yar trust me i have more assulat weapons than you have got clothes
 
G-3 dont hurt much. Shoot a single shot in head or center-left of breast. He's hell out of here. THATS WHY WE USE G3.

over n out

ya sure a .22 round wil also kill you if your hit in the head with it

and like an ak47 or an m16 or an ak74 round wil just bounce off your head
:crazy:
 
about INSAS
fired a mag from it in darra adam khel god know how it reached that gun market
any way ask the nepali millitary
it heated up and jammed on them
they got screwd by moiast rebels due to the INSAS
 
I heard the INSAS has some problems when used in cold conditions, not sure if that is fixed already.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom