Pakistan's Service Rifle (G-3, Type-56) Replacement Competition 2016.

[Basel]

Yes Sir no Gun can match power of FN SCAR so it seem if these are only Guns being tested than I can clearly see FN SCAR coming

What advantages it offer over other competitors in same category in international market?

 

[SSGcommandoPAK]

I think the army is waiting for the Indians , like if Indians acquire a new riffle for there army to replace Insas and Aks ,PA would also go for a new riffle which already is being selected but will be acquired only when India goes for something new waiting for the right moment i suppose ? at the moment the Insas and Indian riffles are no big threat ,if we talk about counter terrorism we have sophisticated equipment and weapons with the SSG .However i would love to see something new tired of the big heavy rusty G3s .

 

[Neptune]

@DESERT FIGHTER @TaimiKhan brothers
in this thread and elsewhere I have expressed my dismay over the way our men (army/ police) shoot the G3.. both are good in their own right but the match seems a forced one. although there are some exceptional shooters and over all those of us (including me) who have held this gun and fired it ... like the gun and can talk at length about how good this gun is.

but looking outside the shooting range in the actual field / war or operation.. the shot on target (or lack of it) leaves much to be desired so any future rifle should address this and keep an average Pakistani youth / soldier in mind who can handle that gun well and be a true shot.

that all said. I came across a video and seen some very good shooting power of our own men ..handling the G3. the guy below is Pakistani but his western (real or inspired) training is showing off.

View attachment 296676

Hey.
To be more precise, I would love to see the video footage first but based on the capture you posted, anyways yeah. He did the chicken wings stance on the photo you have posted. I see no faults on the shooting position, maybe except for his legs although I am not so sure on it hence it's a training range I assume. So rather than inspiration, it's mostly due to his training.

Many people tend to aggressively overreact against chicken wing shooters when they are seen. But honestly from my experience on G3A3 and HK33 in regards of CQB and COIN type engagements, it has ups and downs but in general I'd say "not good enough", with leaving the final say on the user's discretion.

On the shooting range it's acceptable, thus it's a stance that puts higher accuracy as it's goal. In fact when you consider the G3's 7.62 round and it's naturally infamous recoil it is the likely stance you might opt for when in a shooting range, training or sometimes in combat. In fact it's quite often that you might see photos on shooting range or training soldiers using G3 with that position.

But in a combat situation, I think his stance fails.
First of all, this stance contains high risk for the shooter when he is being shot at or when he is at short range because this position requires him to up his elbow above his shoulder as he did like 45 degrees. So directly or indirectly it makes some part of his body an open target inevitability. Although it's rare that some shooters use that in field, but I believe nearly at all of them that happens in a situation only when they are not being shot at, like this I found on Google (or maybe they are shot at who knows);

As for the use of this stance in hot combat zones, it's very rare, at least in our AO. It should not be used in a urban warfare environment either. Take my unit as an example, it's a light infantry (SOC) unit, if the CO ever sees me in a chicken wings position during job whether or not we are taking fire, he probably will stop fighting and break my elbows if he is someone obsessed with rifles in which he is, lol. So it's highly recommended not to use this stance, yes it is very rare to see, but even when this stance is captured by media during combat, it's mostly the specially trained operators who use that, I can't judge them hence they know this better than I do but even for them, some defense geeks start swearing when they're seen in chicken wing shooter stance like this from Southeastern Turkey during an operation, and I think they're right on swearing at some point;
As said, the guy in the middle is police spec ops and the other two are from the Navy EOD teams. You see the first one from right is in the same position.

As per CQB, when cleaning rooms, it decreases your body's area of movement and it gets harder to flexibly rotate the barrel/sight which is important in this situation. This happened to me with a 5.56 HK33, I think you can well imagine how it would go if the weapon used was a G3, and even if I was properly holding it, barrel was too long. Of course it wasn't built to clean houses but when fighting terrorists like PA or we do do there's a point when your team got to break into a property and you need to clean it fast with whatever it is on your hand.

So as a result, the soldier in the photo has held it truly according to the rules (I repeat, I am not sure on legs), but the stance he had preferred is only suitable during training or when there's little to no risk of being fired upon.


If we agree to find the psychical appearances of Turkish and Pakistani men as similar on weight/height and stamina. For a service weapon like the G3 being used by two armies that struggle with the deepest fights on their own soils against terror, you know it better but I think that whatever the PA will opt for, it's gonna be 7.62mm and velocity at least as good as G3. So if such a criteria is a backbone when all the other relevant factors like reliability, climate and barell life are put aside, the better choices for your tender are those that don't require a lot of muscle when both firing and holding. Instead of the body itself if the muscles alone support the weapon after a point you'll lose your accuracy and other things like tire will start to show that's what exactly the chicken wing stance does. In a long term for troops fighting TTP in towns and mountains for long times, these details will show itself in a time when it's not really welcomed at all. It may not bring casualties or harm but in deed it will affect the performance of the troops. One of the other things that should be different and better than the G3 for the future service rifle of yours would be length of barrel but since it's adjustable for all the new rifles on the market so it won't be an issue.

Death to chicken wing!

 

[madmusti]

 

[Zarvan]

I hope Pakistan goes for FN SCAR and I am trying to contact some Army guys and get details and latest updates on this

 

[Immanuel]

SCAR is way out of Pak's financial capacities, the civilian rifle costs over $3000 per unit in the US alone, without any optics. Mil spec versions will cost way more. Moreso, the rifle is not up for licenced manufacture. The Turkish rifles are the prudent choice.

 

[Zarvan]

SCAR is way out of Pak's financial capacities, the civilian rifle costs over $3000 per unit in the US alone, without any optics. Mil spec versions will cost way more. Moreso, the rifle is not up for licenced manufacture. The Turkish rifles are the prudent choice.

Sir we are already testing FN SCAR and we wouldn't have tested FN SCAR if we know we can't afford it.

 

[Immanuel]

Sir we are already testing FN SCAR and we wouldn't have tested FN SCAR if we know we can't afford it.

Well we tested Rafale, EF and every other 4.5 gen fighter knowing very well we couldn't afford either of the Euro-Canards . Besides if the Turkish rifles clears the trials, they'll win the order on price bids obviously.

 

[Zarvan]

Well we tested Rafale, EF and every other 4.5 gen fighter knowing very well we couldn't afford either of the Euro-Canards . Besides if the Turkish rifles clears the trials, they'll win the order on price bids obviously.

Sir latest reports suggest we are not even testing MPT-76

 

[Immanuel]

Sir latest reports suggest we are not even testing MPT-76

Hmm, why not the HK then? since HK already has a history of licenced manufacture in Pak. HK 416/417 are formidable rifles, expensive yet great.

 

[Zarvan]

Hmm, why not the HK then? since HK already has a history of licenced manufacture in Pak. HK 416/417 are formidable rifles, expensive yet great.

No idea why are HK not tested or if tested than why rejected may be our friend @kaonalpha can help us out here

 

[Super Falcon]

Zaarvan immanuel is posts are very very confusing these people will never be happg when did paf tried Rafale eurofighter

Expansive is not a issue here issue is rifle which we want should serve us next 30 years if we go for cheap than we keep replcing gun and waste double the money than better gun

Insas is a big exmple wasted trillions on it yet it failed in 10 years it need to be replaced

If 3000 dollar gun can serve me 30 years it means its yearly cost if 30 dollars

If cheap gun cost me 1000 dollar gun only serve 10 years than i have to replace 3 types of guns every decade confusing to soldiers money waste and time waste

These small brain people brains are not put eye on future they think of only today

Scar or HK are best for enviornment of pak

 

[Quwa]

Not many countries buy their new rifles in one giant swoop. It is generally done through batches of 10,000 to 20,000 every 1 or 2 years. At that scale, you're looking at spending in the tens of millions per dollars a year, not much in comparative terms for an Army with a multi-billion dollar annual budget.

For Pakistan, the main issue wouldn't be buying the rifles, but actually buying the production line and intellectual property rights.

As for the Pakistan Army, I wonder if it would be a good idea to slowly phase in the new rifles with new recruits, who could be trained on the new rifle from the ground-up without having to re-learn from an older model. Moreover, the induction of a new rifle could be phased alongside infantry training and equipment geared towards higher survivability and greater technology use, which could also be channeled through fresh manpower inductions.

 

[Zarvan]

Not many countries buy their new rifles in one giant swoop. It is generally done through batches of 10,000 to 20,000 every 1 or 2 years. At that scale, you're looking at spending in the tens of millions per dollars a year, not much in comparative terms for an Army with a multi-billion dollar annual budget.

For Pakistan, the main issue wouldn't be buying the rifles, but actually buying the production line and intellectual property rights.

As for the Pakistan Army, I wonder if it would be a good idea to slowly phase in the new rifles with new recruits, who could be trained on the new rifle from the ground-up without having to re-learn from an older model. Moreover, the induction of a new rifle could be phased alongside infantry training and equipment geared towards higher survivability and greater technology use, which could also be channeled through fresh manpower inductions.

New ASSAULT Rifle won't come without TOT and whole production will take place in POF Wah

 

[bananarepublic]

Are the rifle`s going to be produced locally or is it going to be imported....???