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

[That Guy]

And our Special forces are happy with their M-4s. I can give you pictures and operations which were fought with M-4s. F-2000 is one of the reliable bullpups. It is a closed system not water, mud or slit is going to damage it. F-2000 are used by SSW their mission in COIN was to jump in and call in CAS or air strikes on targets not for long range patrols.

Type-56 were only used by those units who are going to be behind enemy for a while because you can fin AK ammo easily.

Maybe you should read bullet ballistic data. 7.62x39 is not a good round for penetration but it has good punch and stopping power. Its heavy and slow. It is good in short to medium ranges. Maximum effective range it can travel is 500 yards.

Now, 5.56 is a good round for short to long ranges. It is fast lighter go through body armour easily. It is good round for engagements upto 600-700 yards depending upon optic, shooter and barrel should be 14 inch which is standard. Someone who says 5.56 cant kill give me or someone else to shoot them.

Most of the engagements which our troops and SF units have fought were at long ranges. So what do you want a slow,heavier and short ranged bullet or a faster, lighter and long ranged bullet.

You're right and wrong. Pakistan's special forces such as the SSG ARE happy with the m-4s, but that doesn't mean they didnt encounter problems before. It's a very well known fact that they did in fact have to switch over the type 56, in order to compensate for the problems I mentioned.

While you are correct that the 556 has better piercing power than the 762, the problem with that is it only really applies to soft targets, such as human flesh and ballistics jell. Things like piecing thick sheets of metal, or destroying tree branches, I'd rather use an AK type, as the 762 round is known to not pierce, but utterly rips targets into two pieces, which is why the switch became necessary. In other words, rough targets like trees, you're better off with a 762 round.

While the range for the m-4 is 600 to 700, as compared to the sky's effective range of 500, that matters little as most engagements tend to happen either in long distances, or a distance of roughly 300 yards or less, so you're right about that, but the problem here is that you're misinformed about the distance of engagements that the Pakistan army had to deal with. While most engagements did take place at extremely long ranges, those were mostly potshots at patrolling soldiers, and in those cases, the range was well beyond the 600-700 yards. In which case, battle rifles such as the G-3 were used to engage the enemy, which has a much longer effective range than both the Ak and the M4, due to both its longer barrel, and large bullet...etc.

There was also the issue of environmental damage to the M4 rifles, which is well documented in various battlefields.

 

[That Guy]

As far as I remember US soldiers never had to ditch because their M-4s were jamming.
M-4 is a good platform. IT works in mud, snow at freezing point. Don't know why boomers think these fancy ARs aren't good enough to handle some dust. AKs have limitations too its just myth that AK is some kind of GOD gun which is so much powerful.

At start there ere problems with M-16 in Vietnam but quality rifles were issued in Gulf Shield and they are being issued since then.
Firefights in Afghanistan were mostly long range. Some patrol got ambushed or attack at heir firebase. So soldiers would run out in the open grab AK and get to their rest of team to return fire.

[EDIT] I couldn't find the article about iraq, but it was a well known problem in afghanistan...

https://www.cleveland.com/world/2009/10/in_2008_afghan_firefight_us_we.html

Here is an article that mentions both Iraq and Afghanistan...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/m4-rifles-causing-problems-for-us-troops/

&&

The m4/m16 suffered a lot of problems in Iraq especially, to the point it became a political issue in the US during the time. There were soldiers constantly complaining of jams, due to dust getting into their rifles...etc.

It's a good platform now, because the problems were eventually fixed.

Firefights in Afghanistan constituted one of two scenarios. Either it was long range in other words, potshots at soldiers from militant snipers, who quickly ran off after shooting. Or they were close, and intense.

While I can't personally verify this, I do have a buddy in the Canadian armed forces, who served in Afghanistan, who told me about this. He told me a vast majority of his time there, nothing happened, and of the very few firefights he got into, 90% of the engagements was them getting shot at from a random direction, and not know where it came from, only to find the shooter was long gone.

 

[Fusuoy]

556 being good at long ranges depends on ammo and gun usually, ususally 556 long range weapons use high quality ammo like the mk12 spr

 

[Metal 0-1]

556 being good at long ranges depends on ammo and gun usually, ususally 556 long range weapons use high quality ammo like the mk12 spr

Standard 55 grain ammo fired from a 14inch barrel can easily pushed out to 700 yards.

 

[Metal 0-1]

You're right and wrong. Pakistan's special forces such as the SSG ARE happy with the m-4s, but that doesn't mean they didnt encounter problems before. It's a very well known fact that they did in fact have to switch over the type 56, in order to compensate for the problems I mentioned.

While you are correct that the 556 has better piercing power than the 762, the problem with that is it only really applies to soft targets, such as human flesh and ballistics jell. Things like piecing thick sheets of metal, or destroying tree branches, I'd rather use an AK type, as the 762 round is known to not pierce, but utterly rips targets into two pieces, which is why the switch became necessary. In other words, rough targets like trees, you're better off with a 762 round.

While the range for the m-4 is 600 to 700, as compared to the sky's effective range of 500, that matters little as most engagements tend to happen either in long distances, or a distance of roughly 300 yards or less, so you're right about that, but the problem here is that you're misinformed about the distance of engagements that the Pakistan army had to deal with. While most engagements did take place at extremely long ranges, those were mostly potshots at patrolling soldiers, and in those cases, the range was well beyond the 600-700 yards. In which case, battle rifles such as the G-3 were used to engage the enemy, which has a much longer effective range than both the Ak and the M4, due to both its longer barrel, and large bullet...etc.

There was also the issue of environmental damage to the M4 rifles, which is well documented in various battlefields.

[EDIT] I couldn't find the article about iraq, but it was a well known problem in afghanistan...

https://www.cleveland.com/world/2009/10/in_2008_afghan_firefight_us_we.html

Here is an article that mentions both Iraq and Afghanistan...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/m4-rifles-causing-problems-for-us-troops/

&&

The m4/m16 suffered a lot of problems in Iraq especially, to the point it became a political issue in the US during the time. There were soldiers constantly complaining of jams, due to dust getting into their rifles...etc.

It's a good platform now, because the problems were eventually fixed.

Firefights in Afghanistan constituted one of two scenarios. Either it was long range in other words, potshots at soldiers from militant snipers, who quickly ran off after shooting. Or they were close, and intense.

While I can't personally verify this, I do have a buddy in the Canadian armed forces, who served in Afghanistan, who told me about this. He told me a vast majority of his time there, nothing happened, and of the very few firefights he got into, 90% of the engagements was them getting shot at from a random direction, and not know where it came from, only to find the shooter was long gone.

That's what I am saying. All engagements were long range. Most of the time enemy was not even there.

So there was no grabbing of AK and fighting remaining militants. You just validated my point no one ran towards enemy at the distance of half a kilometre and grabbed their AKs because their M-4s are jammed. This is some Hollywood stuff.

Both articles were based upon same fire team in Wanat. So there lies a chance of 1 being not so good out of 1000.

I found AR a reliable weapon. If it jam mostly because of steel case ammo or uneven feeding of ammo in mags. Just push mag in and pull charging handle.

And type-56 is not AKM or AK-74 which had good reputation. Most of the Type-56 I saw had poor finish both on receiver and hand guard..

 

[Fusuoy]

AR is also more modular and you can put attachments on it easier then an AK

 

[monitor]

Four long years have already passed this thread created but no sign of buying new service rifle for Pakistan. Pakistan could buy couple of thousand rifle from best two three option from the competition and tested those in accual battle conditions afterwards produce the best performing riffle.

 

[Fusuoy]

if im correct we have selected one, just need to buy it and give it to soldiers

 

[That Guy]

That's what I am saying. All engagements were long range. Most of the time enemy was not even there.

So there was no grabbing of AK and fighting remaining militants. You just validated my point no one ran towards enemy at the distance of half a kilometre and grabbed their AKs because their M-4s are jammed. This is some Hollywood stuff.

Both articles were based upon same fire team in Wanat. So there lies a chance of 1 being not so good out of 1000.

I found AR a reliable weapon. If it jam mostly because of steel case ammo or uneven feeding of ammo in mags. Just push mag in and pull charging handle.

And type-56 is not AKM or AK-74 which had good reputation. Most of the Type-56 I saw had poor finish both on receiver and hand guard..

You're cherry picking what I said, actually you're misquoting me. I said MOST engagements were long range, not all.

There is literally combat footage on the internet that you can find of close range combat between US forces and militants. In fact, there is an entire reddit community that's dedicated to combat footage.

You also merely skimmed over the articles, and ignored the parts that mentioned that this was a consistent issue for a long time.

There seems to be no point in arguing with you, seeing as you're arguing in bad faith. If you want to argue with me, then argue properly.

 

[Metal 0-1]

You're cherry picking what I said, actually you're misquoting me. I said MOST engagements were long range, not all.

There is literally combat footage on the internet that you can find of close range combat between US forces and militants. In fact, there is an entire reddit community that's dedicated to combat footage.

You also merely skimmed over the articles, and ignored the parts that mentioned that this was a consistent issue for a long time.

There seems to be no point in arguing with you, seeing as you're arguing in bad faith. If you want to argue with me, then argue properly.

I do watch videos from r/combatfootage.

Okay Sir, nice interaction.

 

[Fusuoy]

any idea though what rifle we chose?
cause ive heard nothing

 

[Path-Finder]

Belarus is being approached for optics. Belarus makes some really good Red dot sights and other Rifle Scopes.

ahhh no belarus is no longer on the horizon as per well he left the forum now @Gryphon

 

[Cuirassier]

So...PK-18 not in the horizon? What viable options do we have? Stagnation hi hogayi hai pa'yaan.

G3 replacement would be a priority. Now that the neighbours are getting a good new battle rifle, should we expect some miracle after an agonizing wait?

 

[Zarvan]

So...PK-18 not in the horizon? What viable options do we have? Stagnation hi hogayi hai pa'yaan.

G3 replacement would be a priority. Now that the neighbours are getting a good new battle rifle, should we expect some miracle after an agonizing wait?

What I am hearing is that finally a decision has been made and yes first G3 will be replaced. There is silence on Type 56. What gun it will be I have no clue about.

 

[Waiting]

Via Belarus.....