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

[The Terminator]

It's funny how people select a rifle based purely on looks with zero knowledge of the firearms industry
I'm a gun enthusiastic with trigger time behind a lot of guns
CZ makes the best affordable firearms in the world hands down. FN on the other hand is expensive & overrated
I really hope PA goes for CZ

When Pakistan Army acquired the present G3 rifle, it was one of the best battlefield rifles available back then produced by a prestigious manufacturer namely H&K Germany. Similarly the MG3 the most effective Machine gun having a pedigree of the most feared MG42 of World War 2. H&K have a track record of troubleshooting and improving the unreliable British bullpups too.

By that standard PA should go for H&K or the next best manufactures like FN or Sig. Or adapt their eastern counterpart equally famous kalashnikov. Nothing less than that. We want the best and iconic weapon not a try hard weapon from some 2nd tier manufacturer

 

[Bossman]

When Pakistan Army acquired the present G3 rifle, it was one of the best battlefield rifles available back then produced by a prestigious manufacturer namely H&K Germany. Similarly the MG3 the most effective Machine gun having a pedigree of the most feared MG42 of World War 2. H&K have a track record of troubleshooting and improving the unreliable British bullpups too.

By that standard PA should go for H&K or the next best manufactures like FN or Sig. Or adapt their eastern counterpart equally famous kalashnikov. Nothing less than that. We want the best and iconic weapon not a try hard weapon from some 2nd tier manufacturer

HK will not sell to Pakistan any more.

807, in Police Commando Units of AP and Telangana Police.

I think still in use with regular Indian Army.

 

[Zarvan]

It's funny how people select a rifle based purely on looks with zero knowledge of the firearms industry
I'm a gun enthusiastic with trigger time behind a lot of guns
CZ makes the best affordable firearms in the world hands down. FN on the other hand is expensive & overrated
I really hope PA goes for CZ

Looks really. Then how come SCAR came first in our trials. To which dominated the trials were SCAR and AK 103. Although several other guns passed. But after six years I give a dam which Rifle comes even CZ and AK-103 I am happy only thing I want is even if CZ comes it comes as whole series from that what I mean is we produce 5.56 CZ and CZ 7.62 X 39 and CZ 7.62 X 51.

 

[SSGOPERATOR]

Assalam o Alaikum
Tou Akhir kb select hogi ye rifle ya kuch select hogya hain?

 

[bhola record]

Assalam o Alaikum
Tou Akhir kb select hogi ye rifle ya kuch select hogya hain?

ghas khana shuru kare pehle pakistani awam phir dekhain ge.

 

[Bigbang1983]

Nothing wrong in any weapon, provided you can shoot to kill.... 12.7 mm to . 22... Everything kills.....

Salam,

A wounded/injured soldier is a much bigger burden on the enemy logistics and resources compared to a dead soldier. I am pretty sure that this factor is important in deciding which assault refile is to go for.

 

[SSGOPERATOR]

Salam,

A wounded/injured soldier is a much bigger burden on the enemy logistics and resources compared to a dead soldier. I am pretty sure that this factor is important in deciding which assault refile is to go for.

Assalam o Alaikum
WDYM?
Sometimes the enemy is beghairat and doesn't care about wounded soldiers.
Wesey will SSG get something special like HK 416, L119A2, etc.

 

[bhola record]

Assalam o Alaikum
WDYM?
Sometimes the enemy is beghairat and doesn't care about wounded soldiers.
Wesey will SSG get something special like HK 416, L119A2, etc.

this is what happens when casualities mount.Taking a soldier from med evac a heli or a car to field doctor if it is serious to cmh an operation in CMH it is costly yes but objective of war is not to kill people but to achive political victory swiftly.Sun tzu says a skilled warrior is not one who fights the enemy to last but wins over the enemy without fighting.

 

[Aamir Hussain]

One of the reasons given in field in US Army for adopting a 5.56 mm cartridge instead of the standard 7.76 mm was the very same reason that Bigbang1983 alluded in his post ..... it takes 8 to 10 people to take care of a wounded soldier vs 3 for a dead one

 

[Reichmarshal]

One of the reasons given in field in US Army for adopting a 5.56 mm cartridge instead of the standard 7.76 mm was the very same reason that Bigbang1983 alluded in his post ..... it takes 8 to 10 people to take care of a wounded soldier vs 3 for a dead one

That theory failed with a big bang i afg n iraq....so much so that foreign troops specially special forces were using guns with bigger catriges specially 7.76 chambered weapons.
The u.s too is moving away from 5.56 n tilting towards 6.8 special.

 

[Bigbang1983]

That theory failed with a big bang i afg n iraq....so much so that foreign troops specially special forces were using guns with bigger catriges specially 7.76 chambered weapons.
The u.s too is moving away from 5.56 n tilting towards 6.8 special.

Salam,
In my opinion..
This theory did not fail. NATO shifted from 7.62 to 5.56 because in a conventional war scenario (NATO vs Warsaw Pact) logistical cost of wounded soldier was estimated to be a lot more compared to a dead soldier. And so the war objective was not to eliminate the enemy entirely by killing each and every soldier but to wound it to such a degree that it's war machine would collapse and enemy would raise a white flag.

Afghanistan on the other hand wasn't a conventional war between two professional armies having any kind of symmetry or similarities. But still one of the many reasons for US pull out or for that matter the Soviat pull out in the 1980s is the cost of care and rehabilitation/compensation of wounded soldiers. This isn't just a burden on the finances of running the war effort, infact it also weakens the political narrative and makes the task of selling the idea of war to domestic audience difficult.

A Soldier wounded in war may talk to the media at times, may become an anti-war activist, seek compensation for mental and physical health (PTSD is too common) and many times even gets involved in criminal activities/domestic violence.

A dead soldier.... doesn't do any of that.

 

[JPMM]

Salam,
In my opinion..
This theory did not fail. NATO shifted from 7.62 to 5.56 because in a conventional war scenario (NATO vs Warsaw Pact) logistical cost of wounded soldier was estimated to be a lot more compared to a dead soldier. And so the war objective was not to eliminate the enemy entirely by killing each and every soldier but to wound it to such a degree that it's war machine would collapse and enemy would raise a white flag.

Afghanistan on the other hand wasn't a conventional war between two professional armies having any kind of symmetry or similarities. But still one of the many reasons for US pull out or for that matter the Soviat pull out in the 1980s is the cost of care and rehabilitation/compensation of wounded soldiers. This isn't just a burden on the finances of running the war effort, infact it also weakens the political narrative and makes the task of selling the idea of war to domestic audience difficult.

A Soldier wounded in war may talk to the media at times, may become an anti-war activist, seek compensation for mental and physical health (PTSD is too common) and many times even gets involved in criminal activities/domestic violence.

A dead soldier.... doesn't do any of that.

For NATO at that time the reasons were:
1. Soldier carry more ammo (holding more time without resuply)
2. Its not so powerfull as 7.62, but it will still make a deadly unjury (you could survive, but you will not fight)
3. After being shoot, if you dont get a doctor, you will slowly die

It was before the bullet proof vests penetration by the 7.62

Sorry for my English!

 

[The Terminator]

Salam,
In my opinion..
This theory did not fail. NATO shifted from 7.62 to 5.56 because in a conventional war scenario (NATO vs Warsaw Pact) logistical cost of wounded soldier was estimated to be a lot more compared to a dead soldier. And so the war objective was not to eliminate the enemy entirely by killing each and every soldier but to wound it to such a degree that it's war machine would collapse and enemy would raise a white flag.

Afghanistan on the other hand wasn't a conventional war between two professional armies having any kind of symmetry or similarities. But still one of the many reasons for US pull out or for that matter the Soviat pull out in the 1980s is the cost of care and rehabilitation/compensation of wounded soldiers. This isn't just a burden on the finances of running the war effort, infact it also weakens the political narrative and makes the task of selling the idea of war to domestic audience difficult.

A Soldier wounded in war may talk to the media at times, may become an anti-war activist, seek compensation for mental and physical health (PTSD is too common) and many times even gets involved in criminal activities/domestic violence.

A dead soldier.... doesn't do any of that.

Plus a constantly crying wounded soldier greatly demoralizes his comrades than a dead soldier and reduces the combat effectiveness of the whole group. Too many injured soldiers in the battlefield may become a huge liability for that military and may render them completely defenseless and immobile.

But in case of Pakistan vs India scenario, we are already greatly outnumbered by the adversary, so injuring them only does not serve our military objectives well.

 

[The Terminator]

ghas khana shuru kare pehle pakistani awam phir dekhain ge.

Jesy Rupee free fall me he. R prices skyrocket kr rhi hen. Rifle len ya na len. Ghaas zrur khani prhegi

Pakistan has to payback $40 billion loan in next 3 years . Compound with trade deficit and budgetary loss = ghaas khani parhegi.

US is in no mood to bailout us this time as we are already very much in the cross hairs of the west due to rising China.

That's why IK can't get Biden on call. FATF is just a joke, expect more sanctions in the future unless we once again decide to work for them as cheap daily wager as we used to do in the past.

The only difference is: this time it's not the poor already crumbling Afghanistan. This time our assignment would be one of the most powerful countries located right next door to us-China. We are certainly going to be the playground of Cold War 2.0. Even futuristic high powered laser rifles wouldn't do much good in that regard.

 

[The Terminator]

HK will not sell to Pakistan any more.

I think still in use with regular Indian Army.

Why do you think Germany wouldn't sell small arms to our military? If we can't afford them isn't their problem. I think H&K new LMG was also available to all potential global consumers. We may have replaced or complemented our bulky MG-3s with them if we wanted to.