Does the service rifle used by a military have any effect on

>>31226502
No, but there is an interesting creation between the envirments nation expect to fight in and the upgrades they give to guns. For example, the US issues optics to alost everyone for rifles, while a country like Finland dosent. Many countries that have been in the Iraq aphganistan cluster fuck for the past decade also use optics and Russia is coming to the same conclusion, abondoning their 1970s DMR approach to optics.

>>31226502

No. They might as well be the guns as far as tactics go.

The last big changes in infranty tactics were in ww2 where motorised infantry became more common and semi auto weapons became more widespread

>>31226502
almost none.

ofc full auto vs semi auto makes a huge difference, but nowadays, an army with AKs would perform just as well as an army equipped with ARs, if both are competently led.

In the greater scheme of things, personal weapons are meaningless. Even in a platoon-level engagement support weapons such as mortars, grenades, AT weapons, HMGs or even engineering tools like explosives and mines decide the outcome and not the individual plinkers.

>>31226792

But that's wrong. The last major change came from the adoption of the AR and AK-74 platforms and the transfer to intermediate cartridges.

OP here, does this also apply to vehicles ?

Would two jets from the same gen and same weight class fight differently ? What about tanks and ships ?

>>31227269

>jets

There's not many classes anymore, really. Anymore there are bombers, attack planes, and fighters. They all strive to have the best capabilities of their class, and if anything that's not a fighter engages a fighter they're fucked anyway.

File: 1459312325081.png (322KB, 540x301px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 540x301px

Whoever has the g36 would avoid mag dumping, and probably have to use sun screen to protect the barrels from overheating.

File: images (8).jpg (23KB, 512x288px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 512x288px

Troops using a RH-only bullpup eg L85 or FAMAS will naturally all carry their rifles with the muzzle facing to the left as they patrol.
Similarly those holding ambidextrous weapons eg LMG/GPMG will be 90% RH or LHs conditioned to shoot RH.
>In close country or urban, set your ambush from their right flank. They will have to bodily turn to react and engage, losing precious seconds.
A long rifle can be carried left-right alternate to cover arcs to both sides of a patrol formation.

>>31228218
>muh miliseconds

Bullpups aren't the best but that's not a reason why.

>>31226605
Well Finland has conscription, so optics might be a cost issue for them

File: images (9).jpg (31KB, 384x383px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 384x383px

>>31228239
Obviously from a nation that has not won a COIN was in SEAsia using 7.62mm rifles.
>RH, LH alternating to cover both arcs

>>31228218
>>31228239
Not necessarily
.
We came to the conclusion that for CQB on the '80 you can shoot left handed, you just don't shoulder it is all, you keep it pointed like a pdw,

>>31226502
To answer OP's question.
When the British army came over from the manstopping l1a1 the filled with cheese l85a1, it went from a mid range to close range tactic.

Then once the ironed out the issues and built the a2 they realised that a bullpup isn't as good as a regular gun for close range as you can't clasp the stock and batter someones brains out.

So the british Army went back to mid range tactics. Which suits the 80, quite well due to its rear heavy characteristics, long barrel for short length, thus reducing long arm sway.

When we were deployed usually lefties ended up with minimis, scatterguns and gimpies. And for house clearance the 80 would be used but almost always with bayonet attached.

>>31228218
In the US Army even with right handed weapons guys on the left side of the patrol carried their weapons facing left for quick snap shots. Then if the attack got drawn out they'd be on the ground and with the weapons back in primary hand.

Do you just make this shit up?

>>31228636
Na he's talking bullpups mate.

He's basically saying if you went to ambush someone you ambush their right side, since 90% of people are righties.

And if they use RH only weapons like the 80 then they have to move their whole body to shoot.

Which isn't a disadvantage, because more accurate shots. the british army generally hands out weapons that are left handed friendly like the sharpshooter, scattergun, minimi and gimpy to left handed people anyway.