Soldier's rifle

The conversation here about Australia's battle rifle is interesting. Their current rifle is not Barbie Doll in the area of snap-in accessories. Its ergonomics are also in question.

Stating that the M-4 is a way to go misses a few things.

In many ways, the M-4 is the M-1 Carbine which first saw service in WWII. Small and easy handling for troops that do not have a primary duty as infantry person. The exception being that the M-4 is short and handy for door-kick-downs...along with all those accessory options. The M-4's 14 inch barrel for a .223 takes away the original design concept of the M-16 with a 20 inch barrel. Terminal effect is reduced.

All of the usuability issues mentioned with Australia's current rifle appear true.

"The F88 is a capable weapon. But the issues raised in Baker’s article, such as its lack of railing systems for modifications, inability to be easily fired in an ambidextrous manner, and lack of an adjustable buttstock, are things that we should look to correct in any future procurement."

Note: I have not shot the F88. Something to consider would be: how many soldiers in the Australian Army have been killed by the short-comings of the F88? That question needs a serious answer before changing rifles. Especially if one wants to go to the M-4.

Soldiers today are still, significantly overloaded. So much so, that your career goal is to become a staff NCO of some kind because 10 years of soldiering takes its toll on your body.

Engagement range? There is one point of thinking that if it is over 200 meters, that is why you have a dedicated Platoon marksman with better training and a more powerful weapon. Sometimes HE effects cannot (or are not allowed to) solve all your problems in all engagements.

So again, any change in the issued battle rifle is very sensitive to fatigue and how much junk soldiers are required to carry. The majority of Australian soldier ops are going to be in hot weather and really hot weather.

Could this be addressed by robot vehicles carrying some of the baggage? Answer: sometimes. A quick look at the map will show you a great amount of hard-going ground where that may not be an option.

If it was up to me, Australia would convert to a rifle that can shoot the Russian 7.62x39mm. This ammo is cheap and has better terminal effect under 200 meters. And as a self-sufficiency effect, this ammo could be made in-country easily. Troops that do not have infantry as their prime manning slot would carry the AK-47 with the folding stock.

That of course is all fantasy if it is just completely unworkable for the Australian soldier.

It will be interesting to see if an F88 replacement ever sees any real traction.

--