When will we stop using this crap?

>>34469455
When the muzzies take over.

>>34469455
dunno man .jpg has been a commonly accepted image format for some time and i just don't see a reason to change it

File: Nicks wrecked 80.jpg (45KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 480x360px

>>34469455
is good weapon, anyone who says otherwise has never used one.

Reliable and accurate.

Its only heavy on paper as a third of the weight is in the shoulder.

>Inb4 leftie

Don't be a mutant scum, there's a reason you'll get issued a minimi if you're lefty

It's fine now, it does the job sufficiently, and there are far bigger priorities for the army.

Did the job for me in Afghanistan.

File: 1483837510622.jpg (35KB, 197x246px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 197x246px

>>34469455
>>34469526
>>34469482
>Br*ts

>>34469535
> still believing memes made by uneducated imbeciles

>>34469526
reg mate?

>>34469547
> still believing memes made by uneducated imbeciles

There not meme's when it's the truth

File: 1484516517365.jpg (12KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 200x200px

>>34469547
If I were to believe memes made by uneducated imbeciles I'd believe Br*tain had a strong military history and provided anything beneficial to humankind.

File: 49287_original.jpg (84KB, 768x960px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 768x960px

>>34469558
prove truth

>>34469562
> Being the country closest to world domination
> no strong military history

stay mad

>>34469482
>Its only heavy on paper
This may by the silliest thing I've read today.

>>34469547
3 para

>>34469590
> never held one

>>34469455
what watch is that

File: 1480036102128.png (2MB, 1950x1789px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1950x1789px

>>34469583
>Happen to be sided with winners while hiding on your Island
>Shoot niggers with spears
>Muh Empire
Nigel Pinkleton you have the same stats as Italy except you maxed out Luck.

File: bad post.jpg (65KB, 625x464px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 625x464px

>>34469612
Having a meme that bad make it irrelevant

>>34469590
>>34469606
I first used an L978A1 as a cadet at 13 and they weren't heavy to me at that age.

Also, leftie.

>>34469612
>>34469640
A meme so bad it should be erased...

>>34469655
*L98A1 sorry I'm using my phone and trying to drive.

>>34469590

Do you use the same dumbbell weight for a lateral arm raise as a bent over row?

File: 1493244610167.gif (2MB, 245x130px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 245x130px

>>34469455
>tmw even H&K can't fix this steaming pile of ass.

>>34469800
>meface when H&K actually fixed it

>>34469606
>>34469655
>>34469736
It's still the weight specified on paper, you ragamuffins.

File: Americucks BTFO.png (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>34469612
Does that mean the US army is shittier than Britains because of pic related?

>>34469462
It condenses the file too much and ruins the quality.

>>34469455
When they're too worn out and need to be replaced entirely.

>>34469455
> crap
Confirmed for neverused, therefore youre opinion is utterly worthless. Thanks for playing.

>>34469455

>Can't switch it to left handed

Dropped


T. Lefty

File: 455B7AFE-4204-4973-A38B-6FBD3CBE8B95-3173-0000032BAC2550A6.jpg (152KB, 620x349px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 620x349px

>>34469461
This
>here is your new service rifle

>>34469482
>Its only heavy on paper
found the bong who's never held an M4

>>34470492
Found the yank with the arm muscles of an infant

>>34470492
m4s have shit balance, your arms have to hold the whole 8lb,
with the '80 your arms only hold 6lbs the rest can go into your shoulder

>>34469482
>Its only heavy on paper
>This 5.56 assault rifle that's heavier than a fucking M-14 isn't actually heavier than an M-14 IRL
Weight is weight you slack-jawed limey inbred, jesus christ.

>>34470509
>the only time a rifle's weight comes into play is when you're shouldering it
Fucking children, swear to god.

>>34470509
>m4s have shit balance, your arms have to hold the whole 8lb,

short AR carbines feel a lot lighter than 8lb

maybe it's just me

File: 1E1892CD00000578-0-image-a-2_1441919882216.jpg (45KB, 306x441px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 306x441px

>>34470541
>>34470559
if you have to hold a rifle in the shoulder for 14 hours a day i'd rather have an '80 than the sharpshooter.

Maybe if i didn't then i'd go for an m4 or something.

Besides you're taught not to sling arms, so its besides the point

look at the way our glorious leader holds it, where do you think most of the weight is?


>>34470563
its easily 8lbs with optic, grip and other shit.

>>34469655
>as a cadet

Post disregarded. Do not reply to the thread again.

>itt; the universally reviled L85 isn't shit and weight vanishes into the ether because lolbullpupbalancebro
Bongs were a mistake.

>>34470601
> western civilisation was a mistake
honhonhon

>>34470601
You pick up and put on two 20kg bergens, one at a time; one has nice shoulder straps and a belt strap, the other has straps made of a single line of paracord. Which one FEELS heavier?
Whilst they both weigh the same, the distribution of said weight plays a large part of how that weight is felt. Because the weight of the SA80 is mainly in the rear, the weight is distributed into your shoulder better than a front or middle heavy rifle. This means that the rifle sits back much more naturally when carrying, meaning less fatigue, meaning less 'felt weight'. You notice the weight of something thats awkward to carry a lot more than something that is ergonomic to carry.

Just my 2 cents.

>>34470468
fuck off mutant

t. ambidextrous

>>34470559
considering the average ""light"" infantry bong carries 110lbs into combat, I don't think another 9lbs means anything to them

File: sexiest piece of ass in the british isles.jpg (15KB, 743x237px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 743x237px

>tfw retarded yanks forced us to abandon a perfectly good bullpup rifle with perfect calibre because of NATO autism

i will never forgive

>>34470874
but then we'd never have had the SLR

>>34470881
they tried to get us to give up the SLR too when they realised
>7.62 was a mistake

>>34470871
110lbs? thats super fucking lightweight, thats my assault load, 170lbs for a carrying load to deployment

>>34470923
>170lbs for a carrying load to deployment
this is an outright lie

>>34470950
cuck spotted
go back to prepping your bull

>>34470923
>average marine carries between 60lbs to 90lbs max on patrol in afghanistan

Sure thing, buddy.

>>34470957
Nice projection, liar.

Post proof, faggot. otherwise you're a larping faggot trying to hussy up your unit

Nice thread, hope you redditors are real happy about ruining this board.

>>34470923

>deployment load was 75kg
>he thinks that he deploys with a human sized pack

The only people carrying close to that are the poor cunts carrying the mortar base plate.

File: y_f84bb14b.jpg (94KB, 720x480px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 720x480px

>>34470950
>>34470966
>>34470993
here's my loadout (kg)

mk7 :1.4kg
osprey: 14kg
Blast nappy: 0.7kg
Molle Belt: 0.76kg
Patrol pack: 2.14kg
belt: 0.14kg
Hydration Pack: 3.64kg
Knee pads :0.5kg
Shelter sheet: 1kg
towels x 2: 0.4kg
Mags (loaded) x 8: 4kg
200rd minimi belt: 2.5kg
200rd 5.56: 2.5kg
LAW: 2.5kg
50 rds 9mm: 0.6kg
Sig 226: 1kg
3 mags 226: 0.6kg
l85: 5kg
l3a1 w scabbard: 2kg
Det Kit: 2kg

that there is 46 kg (101lbs)
That doesn't include rat packs, survival /E&E kit, binos, assault ladder, radio / other comm gear, camo nets, Lasers, tackers, GPS equipment, Skynet upllinks, hornet drones, batteries, other surveillance gear, Longs, laptops, secondary socks, camera, pencils, rubbers, sweets ect...

An the best bit was i was a recce bloke, so i had to travel light to get to the fight

here's a link to an incomplete kitlist by somebody else in my role
(rad what it says at the bottom about my spine)
http://reccesoldier.com/army-kit/weight-of-british-army-kit/

>>34471054
where's the vallon

Also, 5kg Sa80 mate? Either you're a walting cretin or you've rumbled. TES A2's are roughly 3.5-4kg now.

>people unironically claiming that the typical grunt hauls around 100+ lbs on anything besides an approach march
This thread is fucking surreal

>>34471083
British soldiers do carry 40-50kg on patrol in Afghanistan. Main reason why they're transitioning to Virtus, reducing the weight by at least 15kgs.

>>34471054
>>34470950
>>34470976
>>34470966
>>34470979

Oh and that doesn't include abdullahs half dead donkey, carpets you just bought at the bazzar, chinook rotor blade, taliban in body bag, captures weapons, captured ammo, rock samples, soil samples, water samples, crop samples, and bug samples

or that one tonne of green you just found lying about.

>>34471075
i knew i forgot something, i also forgot docs med kit, dog mans woofer, Psyops pamphlets and boom box, and vets kit
also HMVGS, thermal optics and thermal clothing

>>34471083
literally all the stuff listed is all justified, there is nothing we could do without. We often had to lug around american ammo too, because they got lost or got cornered and we'd have to come find them, never have i ever seen anyone eat a pack of biscuit browns is one mouthful

>>34471092
We're getting virtus "soon" (never)

>>34471092

>Virtus
>reducing weight

I thought the point of Virtus was purely to make weight distribution better, not reduce the weight?

Plus it took a fucking decade to deploy Osprey and that was FORCED out. I doubt it gets deployed this side of 2030.

>>34471191
Its already been deployed

The helmets lighter and more comfortable, and the plate carrier is lighter and more comfortable.

It shaves about 5kg off

>>34469590
>What is weight distribution

>>34471134
>>34471191
Rifles, Paras, Bootnecks, Anglians and Yorkshires have already ridden Osprey from stores, yet they still keep ECBA's and webbing.

Also, Virtus is significantly lighter than Osprey. It's also significantly shitter. Literally the only good aspect of the kit is the helmet, which itself barely protects your noodle. Everything else is fragile, flimsy and protects less than Osprey. The material on Osprey can protect you from shrapnel, Virtus can't.

Politicians fucked Westminster over again.

>>34471249
I know the load carrying has litterlly only been used as a jack for cars.

but i understand the helmet is only 3a, unlike the mk7s 3

the osprey plates were a L4, any idea what the virtus plates are

(from what i remember when we were first issued osprey)
The actual cover of osprey is in part partial soft armour and reduces the risk of harm, and the bags that the plates go into significantly protect against frag.

i can probably get away with wearing osprey until its fully phased out.

I still got my mk1 and ECBA lying around somewhere

i love it when brits defend this piece of shit. it's like they have other rifles or carbines to base it on.

File: 04.jpg (113KB, 680x1024px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 680x1024px

>>34471305
LMt sharpshooter,
L119 (diemaco m4)
we also had L100 (g3ka4s)
and HK53s

We do a lot of training across NATO

The only 2 NATO firearms i haven't fired are the F2000 and VHS2

>>34469455
>we

>>34471054
So I guess those ladders aren't strong enough to hold up their weight?

File: 613aca249d96.jpg (172KB, 800x640px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 800x640px

>>34471336
they have a max load capacity of 150 lbs.

They come in from 1m to 5m

>>34470871
t. neverserved

>>34469611

my guess is some model of suunto

>>34471378
t. actual neverserved manlet

>>34469455
I never noticed that fucking retarded extended and tiny magwell before.

What the fuck were they thinking?

>>34470678
Allow me to fix your hypo. The nice shoulder straps fall apart because their design was half-assed. The one with the shit straps weights half a much and the straps don't fall apart.

>>34473732
you've never had a british 165L bergen, the straps are wide as shit and pretty much indestructable.

Some brit threw himself on a grenade but the Bergen took all the blast and walked away with burst eardrums and a smokey bergen

>>34474111
I thought we were making a comparison about rifles not bergens.

>>34474141
regardless the point was proven