Infantry Weapons

[Major V1125]

well wasnt sure if those wide hummers would fit fairly sure a Landy would and ime sure you could fit them out LRDG style

hell theres other vehicles not as wide as a hummer but is an IFV

just dont wanna look it up rite now.....XD

[Womble]

lol i think we know what AKs and RPGs look like by now...XD
why settle for those when you have better weapons?
G36K > AK47
AT4 > RPG7

the only time we saw AKs were when they teamed with Russians and they used AK74s which are better than AK47s, AK47s are like out dated and are better of in civilians that like to go hunting with them XD lol no lie XD
get a more modern weapon for the modern times...AK101 series dude! XD

AT-4 is NOT better than RPG-7.

AT-4 is an anti-tank weapon intended for mechanized infantry. You only have one warhead, you shoot it and you throw the launcher away. That's good and well if one shot does it- but if you need to fire more than once, that's a major problem. An AT-4 weights 6.7kg; an RPG-7 launcher weights 7kg plus 2.6kg per HEAT or frag warhead (thermobaric or tandem HEAT weight around 4.5). An RPG gunner typically carries three-four warheads; if you do the math, you'll see some serious saving of weight compared to the same number of AT-4. Bulk is an issue too: would you be more comfortable carrying three AT-4, or one RPG launcher and three warheads in a quiver pouch?

Then, of course, RPG warheads are dirt cheap to manufacture.

RPG-7 is used as standard issue by many of the Israeli army's infantry units. They have HUGE stocks of captured RPG launchers, some dating back to the 70-s, and those things are still rock-solid reliable. The IMI manufactures improved warheads. I've been told that the units who spent a lot of time fighting in Lebanon preferred RPG-7 over LAW (they also preferred rifle grenades over M203).

[Major V1125]

AT-4 is NOT better than RPG-7.

AT-4 is an anti-tank weapon intended for mechanized infantry. You only have one warhead, you shoot it and you throw the launcher away. That's good and well if one shot does it- but if you need to fire more than once, that's a major problem. An AT-4 weights 6.7kg; an RPG-7 launcher weights 7kg plus 2.6kg per HEAT or frag warhead (thermobaric or tandem HEAT weight around 4.5). An RPG gunner typically carries three-four warheads; if you do the math, you'll see some serious saving of weight compared to the same number of AT-4. Bulk is an issue too: would you be more comfortable carrying three AT-4, or one RPG launcher and three warheads in a quiver pouch?

Then, of course, RPG warheads are dirt cheap to manufacture.

RPG-7 is used as standard issue by many of the Israeli army's infantry units. They have HUGE stocks of captured RPG launchers, some dating back to the 70-s, and those things are still rock-solid reliable. The IMI manufactures improved warheads. I've been told that the units who spent a lot of time fighting in Lebanon preferred RPG-7 over LAW (they also preferred rifle grenades over M203).

the AT4 does more damage than an RPG7 compare the size of the rockets...84mm vs 40mm
the 40mm is more like an anti-infantry weapon now but can only take on Hummers or lightly armored vehicles now...while the 84mm is good for infantry and almost all IFVs and tanks, the RPG7 can only damage a tank but the tank can still fire back and such, yet honestly im just choosing the AT4 over the RGP7 because it packs more punch and the CS variant is ideal for CQC operations, which we're seeing more and more of today...and the RPG7 without additional sights make it very inaccurate...the AT4 is effective at 300m and can still hit at 500m, yet at 300m the RPG7 hit probability is around 22% (stated in the US Anti-Tank Training) yet i can see the effectiveness of the RPG7 and such, the its cheap, reliable and easy to use; still if you can afford an AT4 you would rather have an AT4...

yeah the IDF are really good at using older tech and improving it over time and such, thats why you gotta admire how effective they are in combat and are always able to bring "shock and awe" to ever battle really...

[Womble]

the AT4 does more damage than an RPG7 compare the size of the rockets...84mm vs 40mm
the 40mm is more like an anti-infantry weapon now but can only take on Hummers or lightly armored vehicles now...while the 84mm is good for infantry and almost all IFVs and tanks, the RPG7 can only damage a tank but the tank can still fire back and such, yet honestly im just choosing the AT4 over the RGP7 because it packs more punch and the CS variant is ideal for CQC operations, which we're seeing more and more of today...and the RPG7 without additional sights make it very inaccurate...the AT4 is effective at 300m and can still hit at 500m, yet at 300m the RPG7 hit probability is around 22% (stated in the US Anti-Tank Training) yet i can see the effectiveness of the RPG7 and such, the its cheap, reliable and easy to use; still if you can afford an AT4 you would rather have an AT4...

Everything in the above post is wrong.

RPG-7 fires an 85mm warhead (that's the standard HEAT warhead; the tandem HEAT and the thermobaric ones are 105mm). The launcher is 40mm in diameter, but if you've ever seen a loaded RPG you should know that the warhead is oversized. RPG-7 comes as standard with an optical sight and can be fitted with a night vision sight.. It's accurate out to about 300m (with decent training, obviously). The standard HEAT warhead has the same penetration as standard AT-4, and the tandem HEAT warhead has the same penetration as the HEHP (extra high penetration) variant of AT-4. Now, RPG-7 doesn't have the confined quarters capability, but on the up side, it auto-bursts at 900 meters, which the AT-4 does not. Auto-burst capability has been used to take down Russian Hinds in Afghanistan; it's also how the now-famous Black Hawk was shot down in Somalia.

[Coela Bellatore]

Everything in the above post is wrong.

RPG-7 fires an 85mm warhead (that's the standard HEAT warhead; the tandem HEAT and the thermobaric ones are 105mm). The launcher is 40mm in diameter, but if you've ever seen a loaded RPG you should know that the warhead is oversized. RPG-7 comes as standard with an optical sight and can be fitted with a night vision sight.. It's accurate out to about 300m (with decent training, obviously). The standard HEAT warhead has the same penetration as standard AT-4, and the tandem HEAT warhead has the same penetration as the HEHP (extra high penetration) variant of AT-4. Now, RPG-7 doesn't have the confined quarters capability, but on the up side, it auto-bursts at 900 meters, which the AT-4 does not. Auto-burst capability has been used to take down Russian Hinds in Afghanistan; it's also how the now-famous Black Hawk was shot down in Somalia.

He's right, the RPG-7 is more powerful than the AT-4 but it is meant to be. The AT-4 is a disposable rocket, a person can carry his main, a sidearm, extra ammo, and two AT-4 (ok maybe just SEAL's can). While you can only use one RPG with extra rockets, now a SMAW is more of the same class as the RPG.

[Major V1125]

XD alright thanks for the clarification...XD mah bad

[Stewart5]

hell theres other vehicles not as wide as a hummer but is an IFV

just dont wanna look it up rite now.....XD

The Warrior IFV could MAYBE fit through the gate. What's the official width of the gate?

He's right, the RPG-7 is more powerful than the AT-4 but it is meant to be. The AT-4 is a disposable rocket, a person can carry his main, a sidearm, extra ammo, and two AT-4 (ok maybe just SEAL's can). While you can only use one RPG with extra rockets, now a SMAW is more of the same class as the RPG.

Dunno bout u mate, but the SAS, SBS and often the RMC can carry two AT-4 sized launchers, tho usually just the good old LAW.
Wouldn't trusts the Paras with even one, tho.......

[Coela Bellatore]

Dunno bout u mate, but the SAS, SBS and often the RMC can carry two AT-4 sized launchers, tho usually just the good old LAW.
Wouldn't trusts the Paras with even one, tho.......

I'm sure the SAS and SBS could do it, but from what I've seen the SBS roll low profile. They all have fluent Pashtu and like to wear local garments and use AKM's and PKM's. We keep our Javelin and AT-4's in the truck because we're pussies. As we call ourselves, we're the: BIRDPOOP COMMANDOES!

[Stewart5]

I'm sure the SAS and SBS could do it, but from what I've seen the SBS roll low profile. They all have fluent Pashtu and like to wear local garments and use AKM's and PKM's. We keep our Javelin and AT-4's in the truck because we're pussies. As we call ourselves, we're the: BIRDPOOP COMMANDOES!

hahha. Nice self confidence...
Well, the SBs are mostly water borne insurgent missions, so you might not see too much of them in the middle of the sandbox......

[Coela Bellatore]

hahha. Nice self confidence...
Well, the SBs are mostly water borne insurgent missions, so you might not see too much of them in the middle of the sandbox......

No man, the SBS are quite common when we do Spec Ops DA or ID missions. They are probably the most active of all the Brit's in A-Stan. I don't think I've seen them do an aquatic mission here but they definitely can put the hurt on the Taliban when need be.

[boxvic]

Going back to the original discussion about firearms versus energy weapons, one of the things I love the most about SG is that they kind of take a realistic approach to it. My understanding of physics is that nothing you will ever be able to carry is going to be able to produce a true, accurate energy blast. The best "energy" weapons will be those that use energy to fire a bolt. Pure energy, say plasma or ionized gas is just too unpredictable to ever be accurate.

As O'niell says in one episode, the staff weapon is a weapon of fear, the P90 is a weapon of death. We will never, regardless of our tech level, actual move away from main weapons that fire a bolt. I have always felt SG, for all of the other liberties they take, have been very realistic about that.

[Stewart5]

No man, the SBS are quite common when we do Spec Ops DA or ID missions. They are probably the most active of all the Brit's in A-Stan. I don't think I've seen them do an aquatic mission here but they definitely can put the hurt on the Taliban when need be.

Well, they are former Royal MArine commandos (and a few others) so it makes sense to have them in the thick of it.
Tho I can guarentee you, they may be doing more VISIBLE ops, but I'm sure you can appreciate the fact that there will be high SF presence that not everyone knows about.
Well, accodring to my mates out there at the moment. The RAf ones telling me who they get to ship about......

Going back to the original discussion about firearms versus energy weapons, one of the things I love the most about SG is that they kind of take a realistic approach to it. My understanding of physics is that nothing you will ever be able to carry is going to be able to produce a true, accurate energy blast. The best "energy" weapons will be those that use energy to fire a bolt. Pure energy, say plasma or ionized gas is just too unpredictable to ever be accurate.

As O'niell says in one episode, the staff weapon is a weapon of fear, the P90 is a weapon of death. We will never, regardless of our tech level, actual move away from main weapons that fire a bolt. I have always felt SG, for all of the other liberties they take, have been very realistic about that.

Well, it wasn't just about energy vs projectile, but we'll forgive u
I agree with everything there until "...P90 is the weapon of death....."

:.........*breathes*...

Sorry, but that's funny...........

[Major V1125]

Well, it wasn't just about energy vs projectile, but we'll forgive u
I agree with everything there until "...P90 is the weapon of death....."

:.........*breathes*...

Sorry, but that's funny...........

LMAO! in Stargate the P90 is a weapon that brings death to anything in the show really...but in real life...one would rather pack something with a bit more punch...thats why Mitchell and Sheppard switched over to G36Ks XD
but hell i would pack a P90 just for CQC really, which i dont understand why SG1 started packing P90s when most of the time they're in large areas but hell a transition from the MP5 which was a SMG to a P90 PDW, would kinda make sense...XD

[Stewart5]

LMAO! in Stargate the P90 is a weapon that brings death to anything in the show really...but in real life...one would rather pack something with a bit more punch...thats why Mitchell and Sheppard switched over to G36Ks XD
but hell i would pack a P90 just for CQC really, which i dont understand why SG1 started packing P90s when most of the time they're in large areas but hell a transition from the MP5 which was a SMG to a P90 PDW, would kinda make sense...XD

i don't see why they didn't use M4s or H&K 416s, myself......

[Major V1125]

i don't see why they didn't use M4s or H&K 416s, myself......

lol i bet M4s and H&K 416s are more plentiful in the USAF XD than P90s...but hell i would pack an M4 or 416 over a P90 XD can someone say...M320? =P or M26?
XD