Posts
Being the gamer that I am, encumbrance is often on my mind.
Liking historical characters means I glance at how weights have shifted.
Something I thought interesting is when the US went from 7.62x51mm NATO to 5.56x45 the weight of the loaded rifle dropped from 10.9 lb. to 7.2 lb. (7.5 with a 30-rounder)
When we went from M16A1 to M16A2, we put on a bit of weight. 8.9 lb. loaded.
The M4 brought optics. A bare M4 was 7.4 lb. loaded and adding an Aimpoint M68 raised it to 8.2 lb., using an ACOG M150 instead would change that to 8.3 lb.
The Royal British Army, though... <- h/t to Mr Brock.
Their change from the L1A1 in 7.62 to the L85A1 in 5.56 didn't save much mass at all. The FAL variant was 11 lb. The L85A1, with SUSAT is 11.2 lb.
At least the ammo is lighter...
Even the USMC's, known to be heavy, M16A4 is "just" 10 lb. with its ACOG.
I don’t want to be ‘that guy’, but it’s the British Army, not the Royal Army. This is a leftover from Cromwell’s time. After the restoration of the monarchy under Charles II (?), part of the deal was that Parliament would retain control of the Army, while the Crown got the Navy.
ReplyDeleteIf I understand correctly, the idea was that the Navy couldn’t be used to impose a tyranny but the Army could, so it had to reman under the control of the People (for certain definitions of People, of course).
On the actual topic, I didn’t know the L85 was that heavy. Pity the poor squaddie.
Go ahead and point out factual errors, you were at least nice about it.
DeleteI'll try to remember that their army is the exception the Royal (Branch). I mean it's Royal Navy and Royal Air Force, stands to reason...