Armoured Crewman Weapons

[TCBF]

"The C-8 was even better- short, accurate, reliable, and hit well. We never had "racks" on our Leopard for them....but then we never broke any either.

I for one am VERY happy that we have the C-8. The improvements (light, scope, etc) must be a hoot as well..."

Hey Gary, when is the last time you saw a scope on a C8?  ;D

I've seen at least two go NS due to the bbls working loose.

Tom

 

[Canadian Sig]

"
Hey Gary, when is the last time you saw a scope on a C8?    ;D.

Tom

I am fairly new so don't pounce on me too hard for this but; Is the Elcan classed as a scope or an optical sight? and whats the da*n difference?

 

[KevinB]

I think Tom is refering to the fact that the Armoured for the most part have C8's than C8a1's or C8SFW's - thus no EoTech or C79 Trashcan.

My big problem with the C1SMG was when we removed the C5 knife from service how then did we dig the empty casings from the chamber (it was the only use for the C5 - the awl but hey...) 

 

[TCBF]

Sorry Gary, but I have never been issued a C8A1.  My fisrst C8 was 86AB00285 or somesuch.  No optics.

9mm SMG failure to extract:  Yep.  Bad ammo - weak brass - good gun.  I still bet I could out shoot most C8 operators with it.

But, time marches on.

Tom

 

[KevinB]

Tom, you'd be surprised what a C8 can do...

The USMC has had the top shots with M4A1's over their 500m course - with the det carry handle 

 

[Canadian Sig]

A bunch of us did our PWT prior to going on Athena with C8's (as that was what we were carrying over there). I dont recall my exact score but I know that a few of us shot our own new personal bests at 300m.

 

[KevinB]

FWIW I was down at Knight's Armament Company in Fla. and they had a Diemaco C8 bbl in a freefloat rail that shot under .89" for a group @ 100m.

 

[TCBF]

I recall the stories from the early 80s stating the govt bought - to be used by DieMaCo - the Austrian machine capable of making the best battle rifle bbls in the world. 

The govt still owns it, right?

Tom

 

[KevinB]

The gov't owns BOTH of the Diemaco utilised GFM hammer forges (or they did...)

  Hammer forging is also more cost effective when doing barrels in bulk.  FNMI cold hammer forges their M16FOW barrels on the same type of machine.

  FN uses the same machine doing the chrome lined barrels for their SPR sniper rifle bolt guns

 

[Garry]

I left the Army before we switched to optics- all my shooting was done with iron sights- ands I didn't feel slighted, worked fine.

Lots of discussions about the 5.56 optimum barrel- many think a shorter, stiffer barrel is much more accurate thatn the longer barrels- seems like the posts above support that contention.

Either way, I used both the smg and c1 as my personal weapon, and am very happy with the switch to the ar series.

 

[Ironside]

I'm still very new to the CF - but I would like to ask a question to all those experienced guys out there as I can tell there are.  Given the environments we are operating in, would it not be optimal to have say two crew members sling a C8 when you need to go that little extra distance, and have the other two carry a sub-machine gun, such as the MP5?

Kind of jaded question I know as the operating environment changes constantly, but having a combination or at least the option to have one of the other could open a variety of options I think.  Of course, I could also be completely out to lunch...

Of course there is always that beautiful C6 on top...

 

[George Wallace]

Ironside

The C8 is capable of Full Auto, so why have another SMG onboard?  Too many different types of ammo take up more room in an already cramped space.  The mixture of C8 and C6 is usually sufficient for any contingency when dismounted.  Secondary personal weapons, like a pistol in a leg holster, would be nice in emergencies, but we are severely limited in doing this by the Budget and amount of pistols in the System.  There are also very few MP5s in the System, so the issue of them to Armour Crews is not a forseeable option in the near future.

 

[Ironside]

George Wallace

Yeah, I pretty much saw that one coming - I figured budget would come into it too.  Good points.
Just thought I'd ask - I've never even held an MP5 - it just looks like something that would be easier to carry around and use in an urban environment.

 

[TCBF]

George: We still have about 10,000 plus Browning Pistols in storage.

Tom

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

I think that all crewmen should carry pistols in addition to C8s.  The big obstacle would probably by training (followed by getting enough holsters).  We'd have to dedicate time and ammunition.  Ammo can be obtained, but time is a somewhat finite thing.  I still think that it would be worth it, however, and time spent on weapons training is never wasted.

The C8 is, in my layman's opinion, an excellent weapon for our crews.  It looks to me that it is getting even better.  Both the pistol and the C8 have their specific use, but if I could only pick one I would, of course, select the C8.

As an aside, I visted Diemaco about ten years ago for a PD trip.  The forge that makes the barrels was very impressive.  The Dutch order was being processed and the plant was going full swing.  Struck me as an excellent industrial asset for Canada.

Cheers,

2B

 

[Island Ryhno]

So how much time does an armoured guy get on the range and what type of weapons would you get to use on said range. Are the proficiency levels as high as say the Infantry?

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

Island Ryhno,

I hate to waffle, but the answers to your questions will vary somewhat.  I`d like to see us fire more.  Time seems to be the main enemy, not ammunition.  I tried to get the Sqn on the SAT trainer this year monthly and was somewhat successful.  I fired my C8 three times in the past year and my pistol once.  As a rule of thumb, if you are about to go overseas you will fire more than someone who is not going that year.

In prinicple, all armoured soldiers will annually complete training on the C7/C8 (depending on what they are issued), C6, C9, Grenades, the M72 and the 84mm.  This will involve handling tests.

Then, depending on their training readiness level (assigned nationally) they will fire the following:

  (1)  C7 or C8:

      a.    Everyone will fire the Personal Weapons Test (PWT) level 1.  This could mean a single day of firing for the year.

      b.  People at higher readiness (generally but not always about to go overseas or into a `training year`) will fire the PWT level 2.  This will generally take two days including the night shoot but it could be crammed into one

  (2)  Pistol will be fired by those assigned one

  (3)  the other weapons will again be fired if the member is issued one

The infantry generally fire to the level 3 standard, while armoured soldiers fire to level 2.  Level 1 is at the 100m. Level 2 is at the 200m and includes a night shoot.  Level 3 includes shooting from the 300m but also has some `fire and movement`and close range stuff. 

This MOC-dependant rationale is somewhat debatable these days.  Firing the C8 at the 300m would perhaps not be very effective but the rest of the level 3 would be useful training.  Perhaps we could make a PWT Level 3 for C8 shooters that would emphasize the close range work as well as fire and movement.  We should also practice firing small arms from vehicles at close range targets as this might be our most likely engagement these days.  I think that some of our rifle training still harkens back to Mons in 1914...

Of course, armoured soldiers also spend quite a bit of time on the vehicle weapon systems as well.  Turret crews will get quite a bit of simulator and open range shoots for the 25mm and coax (as well as the odd ack-ack shoot).

Cheers,

2B

 

[SchmDG]

George Wallace
Just thought I'd ask - I've never even held an MP5 - it just looks like something that would be easier to carry around and use in an urban environment.

While I have fired a couple of MP5's, they were both police models (one RCMP and the other local city).  The RCMP one was, as issued and fired, NOT able to fire in Full Automatic.  Something about it being an embassy guard model....  too long ago to remember all the details.  The city one was from the SWAT team, and it ROCKED!

Even though I was only about 14 when I got to shoot the RC one, it was light and controlable enought that the first time out I put 20 rounds in the inner circle at 50m.... 

The city one I traded a few rounds of my muzzle loader (.54") for a few mags of auto-fire....  still seemed very easy to shoot, which is probably why it is used by all of those speaciial teams guys out there.

So, after only a few mags down range, yes it seems like a nice gun to shoot, and it looks nice to carry too.  However, are any other panzertruppen using it???  Some of the reports here mention that they are easily damaged.... 

 

[1feral1]

I am fairly new so don't pounce on me too hard for this but; Is the Elcan classed as a scope or an optical sight? and whats the da*n difference?

A scope is an optical sight and is gernerally a wide spread civvy term half arssed used in LEO and Defence. Like calling a magazine a clip which was a US term from the old M1 Garand days, which became widespread on civvy street.

An optical sight: a sight using optics as a primary zeroing/aiming source, usually magnified a mininum of 1.5X, with a reticule/graticule (small arms and artillery/AT respectivly (I hope I spelled those right).

An ELCAN is called an EOS (Enhanced Optical Sight - it has a GTLS light source, and EY sights for QCB, etc), and in Australia it is known as the Wildcat.


Cheers,

Wes

 

[043]

Feel free to correct me if I am wrong but does the CF have any "Armour" troops anymore? Thought the "Armour" was binned...........

As for the wpns.......they should have a C7A2 like everyone else in the Army.

Chimo!