Got a news item from our tip line today that I’m confirming but I thought I would bring it to your attention.
Seems that the French are potentially jumping on the SCAR bandwagon with a limited deployment of 10 SCARs to its contingent in Afghanistan and Sudan. Our tipster pointed us to a French blog called The Mammoth that said the French National Police officers stationed in Kabul and Khartum, Sudan, will get the 7.62mm Mk-17s. It seems that the forward deployed paramilitary police troops are also tinkering with the H&K 417 “for additional firepower.”
The blog also said that the national police is looking for a replacement for the G36 (seems there’s something lost in my translation — may be looking to replace the MiniMi or both MiniMi and G36 with one gun) and that both the above weapons are contenders.
A word of caution: I threw the blog URL into Google Translator to get the English version. I speak a little French and was able to somewhat cross check the translation, but any of our foreign readers out there with better French skills than mine can dive into the comments and set my interpretation straight.
– Christian
You just said that the 7.62mm MK17 and HK417 are potential replacements for the 5.56 G36 with the national police. Is that good copy?
See correction…bottom line is I can’t quite get the translation right…Upon closer look, might be trying to replace two weapons (5.56 G36 and MiniMi) with one…
I think there is another story here to be told. That the real soldiers of the world who do the fighting are not happy with the 5.56mm round and need something that will drop an enemy when hit. Trained soldiers aim and fire not spray and pray. I never shot anybody but it would be demoralizing if I hit them with 3 rounds and they were not dead.
One shot one kill, give me a real rifle please, not a weapon for REMF’s.
That the real soldiers of the world—
you lost me here..
You have ( self admittedly ) never shot anybody, but then in the same breath pontificate about how demoralized you would be if you hit someone 3 times and they didn’t die. How in the hell would you know?
My question to you is:
How demoralized would you be if you shot once and the someone you shot died on the spot?
But then again since you have never shot at anyone, you, as people say, are in the cheap seats.
Just exactly where you belong.
You don’t know shoe polish from Shinola.
Dude, I think you took to many crazy pills today. Was Big Daddy’s post realy that hard to understand? Common man, it makes perfect since.
Me good guy
Me shoot bad guy 3 times
Bad guy still shoot at me
Me no happy
Me good guy
Me shoot bad guy 1 time
Bad guy no shoot at me
Me happy
Pretty common since stuff to understand here folks, at least for most of us. You would not have to shoot someone to understand this.
Your command of the English language is far superior to your logical ability.
And your language skills aren’t just to sharp, in fact someone that might be of a critical frame of mind, would say that your abilities are on the same level as that of a retarded chimpanzee.
Ciao.
Ahh more derogatory comments, but no argument against the actual contents of the comment. Maybe I did not brake it down good enough for you?
All things equal come to mind. Science 101.
What are you trying to argue against here? ? ? ? ?
More KE and more KE delivered into the target equal more damage done. Is this impossible for you to understand? Do you argue for the sake of arguing? All things equal. I shoot you in the chest with a 5.56 and your cloaned brother in the same spot with a 30–06, if all KE is delivered into the target and not out, the 30–06 will do more damage.
Dear Big Daddy;
If you shoot someone in the foot three times it isn’t much of a wonder that they don’t die right then and there.
In fact, if you shot someone in the finger with a 105mm howitzer I doubt that it would be fatal either.
Even if you shot him in the finger three times.
Hmm, looks like somebody has never heard of the scientific method.
Dear Mike;
By using the scientific method I have arrived at the conclusion that you don’t like me.
Sincerely,
Zandor
Its nothing personal Zandor, just well directed criticism.
The Gendarmes are not trying to replace the g36 or minimi’s they are using those instead of the Famas for their deployments in Afghanistan.
The G36 was being used by the GIGN and other specialized units.
The Famas got serious problems with ammunitions lately among other stuff. The study started to look for a replacement for the Famas, HK and Scar are on the line. It’s being told that the first weapons will arrive in 2010 in some units with a deadline in 2015 to deliver the lasts.
Ok I speak French enough to get trated as a peon (bad N French accent), so dont take my word as gospel.
The Gendarme (an assumption but they are Military even though uner Dept Justice in peacetime) originally went for G-36 and Minimi to equipe their Afghan contingient.
This report is about trialling the SCAR (7.62x51) against the HK417 for the Afghan deployment.. They are looking to update the force equipment in light of experience.
Personal observation is that they have realized the 5.56mm is optimized for European combat ranges and 7.62 is better suited to the Afghan theater. Along similar lines I have seen debate about the M4 and M16. I see the M% as being the answer to urban combat in Irag and it does not have the legs for the longer ranges of mountain warfare.
Remember I’m a sapper, so what would I know ? Just get me close so I can play with C4
This is a slightely rewriten translation of the french article by a french speaker (used translate it in order to gain time) :
Neither a remake of the Lion King or the title of a Oss117 or SAS, but the translation of an experiment being conducted by the National Police (SCTIP) for its staff in Kabul (Afghanistan) and those of Khartoum (Sudan). To have an enhanced firepower, they will get the FN Herstal SCAR (in 7.62 x51 mm) at a rate of ten copies, distributed with another operation theater. This will assess the merits of the weapon in the field, compared to the other star of the moment, the HK417 of wich three copies were purchased by the Police for particular units.
The same staff also benefit from a bulletproof vest type Burgmann class III, with the option to upgrade it to class IV.
Designed by the Belgian FN Herstal SCAR was originally designed for U.S. Special Forces, whose first elements (75th Rangers) were equiped last May.
The + of Mamouth: After the gendarmes, who invest in G-36 and Minimi 7.62mm for their elements in Afghanistan, police starts, in turn, to equip its abroad staff the most potentially exposed.
Choices that will create some jealousy in the opposite house (ie the Gendarmerie), where the needed choices take a much longer time to an agreement . It is true that the number of people concerned is not the same between the two forces (note : the Gendarmerie is a military police force, therefore is prone at operating abroad). The interests at stake therefore attract more than greed, prompting the administration to take his time.
French being my native language, I confirm this the proper translation.
The frogs need a lot more help than just a new rifle!
insulting people of a different country just show your low ethic standards and lack of basic rationale
What in the hell do you know about frogs?
I’d rather eat frogs than a big mac… Less chances of Pilgrim Pride cow faeces contamination.
These heroic troopers are just ripe for a killing.
Just one hand grenade, just one claymore mine, and all of these dorks are instant toast.
On the other hand, they will have all been blasted away while carrying really super neat high tech rifles.
Zandor “I support our troops”
Oblivious?
Dear Mike;
Good for your being a troop suporter.
It is tough being in support of the troops isn’t it?
While the troops are sweating and getting shot, you will be sitting on your fat ass watching a football game.
What a hero you are!
All hat and no cattle.
Ciao!
I don’t mind when you contradict yourself, but then again, I thought you should be aware of it. You seem to have no problem with it.
Bringing insults to the table is no means for helping your situation. The person slinging the most useless mud is the person that is falling short.
Lets try to stick to intellectual, and non derogatory comments.
You really need to TROLL HARDER sport
go to ebaums, ask for tips
Alternatively, realize the futility in your rigid and predictable technique, grow some testicles, and do what MIKE said.
Dear Not Zandor;
What did Mike say?
Are you his big brother?
Ciao.
We are all welcome to opinions here, some are just non pertaining to the subject matter and classless.
Just do what you do, and I’ll do the same.
why not update! Althought I am sure in the end cost will come into consideration
Just because the Frogs turned over and ran like chickens in WW2 that doesn’t mean they’re still poor soldiers.
The French are not the cowards as you imply they are.
The USA is the country that has a fit when it loses a few soldiers in Afghanistan.
I suggest that you look at the battle of Verdun, and then tell us about the French being chicken.
The yankees don’t even have a clew as to what a real war is like.
The French and the Germans however do.
“The Yankees don’t even have a clew to what a real war is like”
I just read your post in amazement. Literally. I am amazed there are people like you. Your unintellectual and insensible comments are good for others to see how people of your nature think. I have seen others, and the agenda is always the same, no matter how you spin it. Very obvious.
Dear Mike;
Thanks for letting the world know that you can not only read, but you can be amazed too.
Your next assignment is to learn how to comprehend what you have read.
That will probably take you a very long time.
By the way, are you still a phonetic guru, or have you decided to go into something more productive, like raising turnips in your flower pot?
With your vast experience in phonetics, I am confident that after only a few years of study, you will be one of the best turnip growers on your ward.
Ciao.
“the frogs turned over and ran like chickens in WW2”… Sorry, what are you talking about? Missed some history classes, didn’t you?
Just read at Janes that they are buying an additional numer of Felin systems. These are linked to the Famas, so a short term replacement of the Famas is not the issue here. It could indeed be that for this theatre they want something with more range and lethality.
To be honest, from what I heard, it’s not a new rifle the french need!
I heard they only get to put a very very limited number of rounds down-range in training.
Rest of the time, they shoot using a simulator.
(info from a friend who joined the french during their training for a few weeks)
The truth is that every regiment shoots an average 500 000 bullets in trainings before going to Afghanistan (800 000 for alpine hunters before deployement last and present winter). Where did your friend joined the frenchies?
BTW; troops in France don’t shoot a much as needed, but in theatre, our officers will employ any means, including lying, deceit and plain old stealing so that their troops get to have practise and thus don’t get killed.
In 1939 french troops had incompetent leadership, inept politicians and strategy that had been proven wrong twice before (1870 and 1914).
French troops when given proper officers, Bir Hakeim, Italy, D-Day etc, proved more than need be how much they love killing germans. And are rather good at it.
Right now french troops are good, officers are good, a lot of our mid range equipement sucks, we lack ammo in quality and quantity, our procurement is bad, but not as bad as the English and our politicians are starting to move bases around for political reasons. Our big toys (tanks, planes, ships) are good, but we have an odd mix of old and new that can be a logistical problem.
And please keep telling everybody, especially on pro AQ sites and blogs, how lame we are, and that we run at the sight of a gun cut-out in plywood. Because it could make some of brain-dead rag-heads overconfident, thus even easier to kill.
Dear Gildas;
What is the definition of mid– range equipment?
Is it a vehicle with half a tank of fuel?
Sincerely,
Zandor
Radios, VAB’s (strykers), drones, light artillery (mostly ammo related), AT man portables etc… Anything that a man can’t carry or is not big and sexy to the press. I’ll ask a reservist arty friend for more current exemples.
Allready on internet:
– Our tracked vehicules (not Leclerc) break down all the time.
– Troups still buy their own shoes before deployement.
Some idiot in an office decided that all troups have to have the same uniform… Sniper down to Minimi gunner. Troops ignore this order.
Trucks with no 3rd gear (you shift 2nd to 4th).
–FAMAS amo not accurate, and nobody makes it anymore.
Friend not in, can’t get anything fresh.
again ugg boots??
These soldiers should simply leave their rifles in their barracks. They obviously don’t think that they need them.
These dorks are in the open, they can be shot at any time, and they don’t have their weapons at the ready?
Wow!
I am sure that these warriors mothers are super impressed with the photos.
I am not.
You know it’s probably a photo-op somewhere in France, right? These guys look way too clean and dry to be in Afghanistan.
And it’s a medium telephoto that shortens perspective somewhat.
now i know you have no experience
maybe its a publicity photo? you think they would all bunch up and make themseves a big fat target..give the French thier props, they do more than the GERMANS…
check the MiniMi is refering to FN’s ??
I find it super amusing that people just want to bag on the french all the time. No matter what happened some 60 years ago, these guys are there now, in the fight. Where are you? Most of us are just commenting, these dudes are living it. I think that the double standard of only giving praise to certain troops is lame as hell. These guys are all putting it on the line, and should be treated equally accordingly.
the 5.56 is not a really good round for the kind of combat in a-stan. if i had my way, it would be 6.8mm and up. there are plenty of 6mm weapons around. the 5.56 does not transfer the kinetic energy needed to punch through a mud wall, a windshield..get rid of it..
The French our doing more to help us in A-stan than the Germans are from what i’ve seen. And i agree the 6.8mm is good moderate caliber. More punch than 5.56mm and recoils about the same. A cousin of mine in the 5th SFG actually said the SCAR wasnt all it was cracked up to be. He felt it was very ergonomical rifle but didn’t fell it was made for rigors of combat. Also did any one notice the US soldier in the rear of the photo?
dude, seriousy. what do you smoke for such ******** of posting?
He was still sharp enough to notice the American soldier.
ur right. the beer swilling Bundeswehr are a big fat target, and the French are actually FIGHTING..don’t believe the sterotype, its the GERMANS who wear skirts..really a disgrace..
What part of “stand-off” distances doesn’t the allied military in AFGN understand ?
Ambushes usually start with IEDs and RPG’s and an odd bolt action rifle or sniper type weapon to try and pick off honchos, RTO’s & medics. ANYONE who still thinks a 5.56mm round is going to be effective in that combat zone is unable to comprehend the reality of “one shot = one kill”. The TaliQueda do not expose themselves for very long in those mountains and hide behind buildings or inside them in an urban firefight. We’re talking over 150 meters and about 3 seconds of exposure time per target. It puts a real premium on instantaneous target acquisition and stopping power. On top of all this is the morale boosting ability
to drop a bad guy around his fellow Jihadis with only one round at distances where their AK-47’s are doing the “spray & pray”.
“We’re talking over 150 meters and about 3 seconds of exposure time per target.”
PERFECT!
That’s exactly what we are redundantly, and relentlessly trained to engage!
I think it is a good move on France’s part. I hate the 5.56mm round with a passion. It is underpowered and cannot take a man down unless you hit him in the head. Now the 7.62mm definitely has the knockdown needed to drop someone in their tracks. I would prefer that NATO switch to the new 6.8 spc round. It is the perfect blending of the 7.62 and the 5.56.
Dear Dom Payne;
Let me dissect your comments.
1.) You say, the 5.56… ” cannot take a man down unless you hit him in the head.”
Have you ever shot anything human in your life using a M-16 round?
I have done so many times, and an M-16 round will drop the target real fast.
Listening to you pontificate about the M-16 round being only good for head shots proves one thing only.
2.) You say, ” The 7.62 mm definitely has the knockdown needed to drop someone in their tracks.”
I have shot humans with 7.62 mm in both AK and M-14 cartridge configurations at similar ranges, and didn’t notice any difference at at all between them and a M-16 round.
3.) Then you go on to say that, ” I would prefer that NATO switch to the new 6.8 spc round it is a perfect blending of the 7.62 and the 5.56.”
So you are therefore in favor of blending the 5.56mm which is completely innefective other than for head shots, with something you think is great, and posit that the blended ballistic bastard will be something that is the answer to rifle effectiveness?
Ciao.
Perfect realistic response.
You have to realize that the majority of civilians are led to believe in a “Hollywoodized” version of reality, in which the staggering difference between a 5.56 and a 7.62 are the difference between a huge explosion and a bird getting its beak knocked around its face until it sits right again, a’la Warner Bros. style.
I have a feeling that most civilians do not understand the beauty of the 5.56, which is completely repeatable, and non-fatiguing accuracy.
Spraying is still spraying (A’la Fedayeen), and we are certainly trained to do something far more effective. That whole “aiming” thing.
Anyways good response. Would read again.
The 5.56 is not a poor round, as is constantly criticized. While a round “could” have more power, it would lose a lot of its optimal ballistic characteristics, while being extremely easy to fire (less recoil). This is the primary purpose behind round development such as the 6.8 (in either Grendel or SPC).
I deployed OIF I, first wave, March 20th 2003. The gripes associated with the 5.56 round are reasonable gripes, but you must realize the actual tradeoffs.
Switching to a non-NATO standard would cause a back supply for years to come. Although, it may be nice to get some American Ammunition manufacturer on the bandwagon, and mass-produce this new round for our local boys, and exportation (External economic stimulus) to needy countries. The other bad part, and the focal point that gives military bodies headaches, is the following requirements for retooling of its armories, and retraining of its personnel on a massive level.
I know many people here have a bastardized view of the M16 and all of it’s variants, but please do not be so critical of it. My combat experience with it was what some may call “extensive”, and the innate beauty of the weapon platform is its absolute dead-nuts accuracy. This is not Vietnam. We are not shooting crap powder. We are not still handing out weapons with the wrong barrels. We are trained to maintained our arms, our equipment, and ourselves.
Really dig into the science of ballistically comparing the rounds, and then take a good hard long thought at what the real difference is.
The 7.62 is a sweet round, but the 5.56 is not as bad as many of you are quick to criminalize.
After separating, I bought myself a Panther Arms Bull Twenty, and you bet I ordered it chambered in .223/5.56
The 5.56mm has tremendous terminal ballistics at closer ranges 100-200m. At these ranges it does more damage that the 7.62x51.
After the round penetrates it yaws 180 degrees, When it yaws to 90 degrees the projectile flattens and fragments,
One of the problems with the 5.56mm is the damage it does is directly related to the velocity the projectile is traveling. At longer ranges the velocity drops off, shorter barrel (M4) the less muzzle velocity = less damage.
The nice thing about the 7.62 is it consistent. What damage it does at 100m it will do out to 600m.
Dear Ryan;
Re; the 7.62.
You say that ” What damage it does at 100 m it will do out to 600 m.
Have you any evidence to back up your statement?
I bet you don’t.
That is because sadly you don’t know what you are talking about.
Dear Zandor
I think you are missing my point, which was that the 7.62mm (referring to 7.62x51 NATO) is not as velocity dependant as the 5.56mm is. As it does not fragment like the 5.56mm does.
Other than greater penetration at closer ranges, the 7.62mm will still effectively yaw 180 degrees in soft tissue at 600m. I did, at one point, have photos of ballistic Gelatin blocks that were fired at out to 600m to show the effects of 3 different cartages 7.62x51, 7.62x39, and the 5.56x45.
All 3 cartages were FMJ only.
Have you any evidence to disprove my statement?
I bet you don’t.
Turkish troops prefer 7.62 G3 over 5.56 HK33.One of soldiers says that “In the mountain PKK terorists use dogs for alarming purpose.We need to kill that dog.I shoot six 5.56 round to that dog with my HK33 at close range.The dog still alive.We got mad.7.62 G3 still best”
I don’t know guys. I love my AR-15 and have killed many deer with it but unless it was a head shot ‚then I almost never dropped them in their tracks like I have with my larger rifles. It was always lethat but sometimes it took a while for the animal to go down. I can not believe that shooting a man who’s weight and body cavity is very similiar to the deer we have here would not have the same results most of the time. Our soldiers need more knock down power than that.
Dear Jace;
There is a huge difference between a 140 lb. deer and a 160 lb man.
The deer is many more times as tough as is the man.
So you should not not compare them with each other.
In my hunting experience I can’t recall anything that I ever shot that ever dropped in its tracks. And I do have quite some bit of hunting experience.
Dear Jace;
A deer is far tougher to kill than is a human.
So please do not confuse ball bearings with grapes.
A man is tough to kill too. If he is on drugs and his adrenaline is going he will take a lot of rounds before he goes down.
If he’s screaming and yelling while shooting at you unless you make a head shot or hit some ganglia of nerves he might get close enough to even stick you with a bayonet or throw a grenade.
So I think the comparison is very good. Talk to anybody who has been in combat or law enforcement and ask them if they ever killed anybody with one shot that was in an agitated state. Yes maybe with an M-14 or Garand or a head shot, maybe center mass and a direct hit in the heart.
Dear Big Daddy;
Enemy soldiers in combat, contrary to all the movies you have watched, are not on drugs, nor are they chained to their machine guns.
Anymore than US soldiers are on drugs, and chained to their machine guns.
Combat involves lots of movement. Chained soldiers are not very mobile.
The entire story is an ” urban legend “.
What you are regurgitating is propaganda that you swallowed when you were a child.
Ciao,
Zandor
Dear Big Daddy;
Just how many men have you shot at?
How many men have you hit?
How many men have you killed?
Answers the above questions.
0.
0.
0.
i do realize the logistc nitemare it would cause, but maybe we can do it in phases? the 5.56 is low recoil, flies out of the barrel at 2,700 ft per second? but you need to hit a man in the head, neck, center mass, pelvis. yes, it tumbles, but it can go right through w/ out stopping anyone. give me the Bushmaster chambered for 6.8mm? I’ll pay the $1600…
Dear SkysoldierRecon;
The muzzle velocity of the 5.56 is far faster than 2,700 fps.
But according to you, you need to ” hit the man in the head, neck, center mass, pelvis” to do any good.
Good God where else on the human body can anyone place a bullet?
The fingers, toes and ears?
You don’t know what you are talking about!
All things told about the venerable 22/223/5.56 projectile. In ideal conditions on the farm, asingle shot in the eye on a deer grazing would put him to sleep right then with no chase. A kill with a 30–30 he would run for approximately 3 seconds, at 40 plus miles per hour sprint until he ran out of blood for his pump to circulate. It would be a long tracking job to recover the meat. The 7mm by 57mm was a good deer gun with a 130 grain boat tail bullet. Good range and good ballistic co-efficient for average 100 to 300 metre distance. Deffinitely a man killer a that range.
The 7mm is about .274 or .280. and with a good flash suppresing mussle brake. And a shock suppressor stock. Light, accurate, built on a titanium alloy M14 action, wow.
The muzzle velocity is about 3200 FPS. With the new propellants available probably more. The 7mm by 57mm was about 2700 fps with a 130 grain hornady boat tail spitzer bullet, with 4831 hodgen powder and would print one on top of the other at 100 metres. Old design but been very succesful and copied from necked down 06’s to a lot of weatherby calibers.
Dear Mike;
Kinetic energy is a nebulous figure that is discussed endlessly by people sitting around with adding machines and not much experience as to actual results.
Lethality is much more dependent on bullet diameter and bullet weight than it is on the sheer velocity of the bullet.
Increasing the velocity of a bullet a few hundred feet per second adds almost nothing to the lethality of that bullet.
It does however increase new gun sales, and give hunters etc. endless things to argue about.
Roy Weatherby hopped aboard and promoted the US craze with velocity uber alles, and it hasn’t stopped since.
KE is calculated with mass and velocity, not just velocity. Velocity does nothing unless its all directed into the target, and not out the other side. If I shoot something with two identical bullets, but one has a higher velocity, and they both don’t go through the target, more damage is going to be done with the faster bullet. Granted they both don’t go through, one is going to have to expand greater or fragment to deliver its full potential, thus greater damage.
Dear Mike;
You are discussing the ” energy dump ” theory.
It is false, even though at first blush it seems to make sense.
Example.
1.) A bullet goes half way through a target and then stops, It has therefore dumped 100% of its energy into the target.
2.) A bullet goes all the way through a target. This bullet has not dumped 100% of its energy into the target, but it has dumped just as much, if not more, energy into the target as the bullet that stopped in the target.
It had to in order to get all the way through the target, didn’t it?
It takes more gasoline to drive a mile than it takes to drive a half of a mile.
It takes more energy to drill a hole all the way through a piece of wood than it takes to drill the hole half way through. And the object that is being drilled will absorb less energy with a half way hole than it will with a hole that goes all the way through.
The energy absorbed is directly proportional to the length of the hole being drilled.
Think about it for a minute and you will see that I am right.