Good Lord, how many old & bold do we have on here?!?!
At least one of you is fron a decent regiment, eh foxhound (though that does look suspiciously like a Rangers cap badge, so no-one's perfect)!
As far as buying SA80A2s is concerned, they'll be lucky. The weapon went out of manufacture about 20 years ago.
"My weapon was overheating," McKaig said, according to Cubbison's report. "I had shot about 12 magazines by this point already and it had
only been about a half hour or so into the fight. I couldn't charge my weapon and put another round in because it was too hot, so I got mad and threw
my weapon down."
I suppose employing the well-practiced 'if the weapon stops firing, throw it to the floor and stamp your feet' stoppage drill didn't helped.
Fire controle does seem to have played a part in the tragedy. Saying that, the stated rate taught to British troops firing on
rapid is 30rds
per minute. That means the 12 mags would be burned off in under 15 minutes if fired continuously, including reloads. The weapons should be able to
handle that rate of fire, though it's bad discipline.
Automatic fire should only be used if a position is in the process of being overrun. Up until that point, a deliberate rate should be maintained to
conserve ammunition, with rapid only being employed during the assault. To blat away on rapid for this amount of time shows poor drills. I've been in
patrol bases that are being attacked by large numbers of well organised Taliban from multiple angles. It's up to the commanders to keep a grip of the
lads to control the rate of fire.
Put it this way. The attack lasted 12 hours. This one lad (and he wasn't alone) squirted off 360rds (12 mags) in the first 30 minutes. To keep up
that rate he would need almost 9000rds of ammo. That's 10 full cans of ammo
per rifleman. Three times that if you're a SAW gunner.
I'm not saying he did (or could) keep up that rate, my point is fire discipline needs to be controlled or else weapons will fail and ammo will dry
up.
[edit on 29-12-2009 by PaddyInf]