Here's a question:
We notice that in the 2180s, the NSL are using an SG-58, which
suggests a 2158 deployment date (or perhaps design date?). What do we think is
a likely length of time for someone like the NSL or NAC to issue a core piece
of kit like a rifle to all of its forces? A year, ten years, twenty? And what
do we expect rifle (or other small arm) service life to be before replacement
with a newer design? Obviously the German weapon is over 20 years old.
The french have the FA-75 which suggests (perhaps) a 2175 deployment
(hence Gauss perhaps?). Maybe the next NSL weapon deployment will be Gauss.
Interestingly, the UN has an ISW-82 (I think that's it...),
suggesting its latest model designs are very recent. If one assumes
that UNSCM are a small force, then it would be possible by 2183-85
for most or all of the force to have received the new ISW. But perhaps the ESU
or NAC would have far more problems equiping all their front line troops in
the same period?
Just something I'm mulling over. Thoughts?
PS - Mr. Brewer, you caught one doozy of a typo in that post to
DAWGIE. And my response to that was "Oh My Gracious!". What I wrote
> --- kaladorn@magma.ca wrote:
...
> Just something I'm mulling over. Thoughts?
Have all these thing been defined? Just because one power has a later number
on
the issue rifle does not prove/infer higher tech.,
it could be the same rifle concept issued X years later by the other power. It
is also not necessarly true that 'all' units have the later issue weapon. What
it really comes down to is: what do you want to be happening in your sector of
the universe?
Bye for now,
> --- John Leary <john_t_leary@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > 2175 deployment
In the case of the FA-75, it is higher tech. Gauss
rather than caseless or binary liquid propulsion.
> TomB wrote:
> We notice that in the 2180s, the NSL are using an SG-58, which
A couple of comments:
* The Carl Gustaf RCL was first accepted into service in 1948; thus it is
known as grg m/48 in Swedish service. However, there's also a grg m/95
(IIRC - I could be a couple years off as we almost never use the Army
nomenclature at work)... which is simply the latest (third) model of the
same old weapon, with a lighter barrel (glass fibre-wound steel liner
instead of steel all the way through) and a slightly different venturi.
There's virtually no functional difference between the two models (the lighter
weapon is slightly less accurate precisely because it is lighter, but that's
it)... yet the type of analysis you applied above would suggest
that the m/95 is vastly more modern than the m/48.
* The numbers could refer to something else entirely - caliber, power
output, position in the quartermasters' lists... perhaps not too likely in the
NSL given their historical and current practise, but for the FSE and
(especially) UN - who knows?
Regards,
[quoted original message omitted]