NationStates Jolt Archive

The Armed Nation Of Troen has a thriving economy, many space programs existing for military purposes, several contracts have been made for a stealth fighter/bomber planes and hind helicopters. The major downfall is the infantry weapon. The entire nation is carrying RPG-7s, Aks-74us, outdated camaflauge, and little/no means of communication. There is currently a bid up for any nation to supply Troen with infantry gear/weapons. Please post with your bids if interested.

Okay heres my offer:

- Basic Vietnam War Direct Phone Links (I.e. - Wind up Phones).
- 100,000 M16's.
- 1000 T82's.
- 2000 BMP's.
- 1000 Carl Gustav Launchers.
- 1000 Mig 27's.

For $2,000,000,000

im sorry, The nation of Troen is looking for more advanced gear, what you offered us is bearly an upgrade from our current setup. The price you offered was reasonable, but the gear isnt much more then a vietnam era hand down.

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=275540&page=1

Thats my storefront. I have many many things for very cheap. The one thing I dont carry though, are guns and such. But I have stealth bombers and stealth fighters, and the Mi-35 Hind :)

yes, i recently bought 20 mi-35 hinds from you

Heres the guns you want, have fun shoppin in my front.

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=326747

Chellis would like offer you a best of the best real life equipment...

The Famas G2 assault rifle with the FELIN system, including the scope/sights. $2100 dollars for the gun and sight system.

The Eryx medium Anti-tank missile. 900mm of penetration with target acquisition at 1,100m with the Mirabel sighting system. $12,000 dollars for the launcher, $1,200 for each missile.

The AMX-10RC Reconnaisance tank. Has a 105mm cannon able to take out NATO triple heavy targets. Also has a 7.62mm machine gun, and uses an autoloader. 3 man crew. $1.9 million dollars.

LeClerc Main Battle Tank. Has an 120mm L52 main cannon with an autoloader, giving it an RPM of 12 rounds. The gun can be fitted with the Polynege missile with a range of 7k meters and top attack abilities. The Leclerc has a top speed of 72 kmh, a 12.7mm machine gun and a 7.62mm machinegun. The armour is composite spaced armour, the leclerc has the Galix protection system with 19 smoke grenade launchers, and the leclerc can be fitted with ERA, which adds 400mm extra armour. This tank can outrange, out gun, out armour, and outrun anything else on the battlefield. 5.6m dollars each.

yes, i recently bought 20 mi-35 hinds from you

Oh....lol :) *grins*

LoL.. I sell FA-MAS's for much cheaper than 2100 bucks... (plus if you wanted to add stuff to them it would just be 50 extra bucks for the attachment)

The Famas can be sold reasonably for $900. The Felin is what costs so much(Look at the XM-8. The gun is $600, with sights its $1,800. Red-dot scopes and regular scopes are one thing. FELIN is the future of weapons.)

We are selling the AMX-10RC's at 700,000 now, we had a wrong price before.

The price for the Eryx is 40k dollars, the missiles are 12k. We had the price for that wrong as well.

The Leclerc is 7.4m dollars. We are sorry for so many wrong prices.

Use either of the links in my signature (official forum or storefront).

For I sell state of the art XM-100 Assualt Rifles, They are 9.62 mm and are equipped with a permanent laser scope. They go for 1200 Rubles each.

You can always visit my storefront here:

http://tncforums.proboards34.com/index.cgi?board=TRWD

We have at least a few things worth looking at.

Sorry.. I now have the contract.

Thank you all for your feedback, but cotton mouth has all weapons sales in the future unless he goes bankrupt. I would be purchases vehicles in the future but for now, im all set, thank you again everyone. ::salute::

Well if you ever change your mind you are welcome over at my places.

You still need vehicles, dont you, Troen?

You still need vehicles, dont you, Troen?
yes

We have a large excess stockpile of nuclear warheads, both isolated as well as equipped.

We can be flexible on price.

*May I, however, recommend some of Chellis's LeClerc tank's, they are very good from what I hear...

We have a large excess stockpile of nuclear warheads, both isolated as well as equipped.

We can be flexible on price.
my country is a producer of uranium and has made several bills to produce weapons. We currently have satalights with nuclear capabilities, i in no way plan on using these weapons.

Chellis would like offer you a best of the best real life equipment...

The Famas G2 assault rifle with the FELIN system, including the scope/sights. $2100 dollars for the gun and sight system.

The Eryx medium Anti-tank missile. 900mm of penetration with target acquisition at 1,100m with the Mirabel sighting system. $12,000 dollars for the launcher, $1,200 for each missile.

The AMX-10RC Reconnaisance tank. Has a 105mm cannon able to take out NATO triple heavy targets. Also has a 7.62mm machine gun, and uses an autoloader. 3 man crew. $1.9 million dollars.

LeClerc Main Battle Tank. Has an 120mm L52 main cannon with an autoloader, giving it an RPM of 12 rounds. The gun can be fitted with the Polynege missile with a range of 7k meters and top attack abilities. The Leclerc has a top speed of 72 kmh, a 12.7mm machine gun and a 7.62mm machinegun. The armour is composite spaced armour, the leclerc has the Galix protection system with 19 smoke grenade launchers, and the leclerc can be fitted with ERA, which adds 400mm extra armour. This tank can outrange, out gun, out armour, and outrun anything else on the battlefield. 5.6m dollars each. ill buy 10 leclercs

They have been shipped, for 74 million dollars total.

ill buy 10 leclercs

If you want some quality US/British armor I have that all on my storefront as well as a special clause that says we can produce anything that isn't listed.

If you want some quality US/British armor I have that all on my storefront as well as a special clause that says we can produce anything that isn't listed.

Quality and US in the same sentence? ^_^

Hey Hey.. dont go too far.. id still take an M1A2 over a LeClerc...

Hey Hey.. dont go too far.. id still take an M1A2 over a LeClerc...

Combat proven M1A1/A2 over a French miltiary weapon. French, military, weapon all in the same sentence??? Yeah that's obvious.

Combat proven against T-55's. That gives it my mark of approval.

Both have classified armour, so you cant really argue that. LeClerc has a much greater weight to power ration and speed, L52 gun over L44, Polynege gives it a 3k meter range over the Abrams, Finders is at least as good if not better than the american equivilent, LeClerc has galix, SNPE ERA is already developed for the LeClerc which can add 400mm extra protection... All that the Abrams has over the LeClerc, maybe, is armour, and both countries heavily classify that.

French equipment is usually much better than american equipment. Famas is much better than the M4a1/XM-8. Eryx is better than SMAW, and HOT is better than TOW. Rafale is better than F-15, Tiger is better than Apache, Mica is better than AMRAAM, the list goes on. The american army is becoming quantity over quality.

Combat proven against T-55's. That gives it my mark of approval.

Both have classified armour, so you cant really argue that. LeClerc has a much greater weight to power ration and speed, L52 gun over L44, Polynege gives it a 3k meter range over the Abrams, Finders is at least as good if not better than the american equivilent, LeClerc has galix, SNPE ERA is already developed for the LeClerc which can add 400mm extra protection... All that the Abrams has over the LeClerc, maybe, is armour, and both countries heavily classify that.

French equipment is usually much better than american equipment. Famas is much better than the M4a1/XM-8. Eryx is better than SMAW, and HOT is better than TOW. Rafale is better than F-15, Tiger is better than Apache, Mica is better than AMRAAM, the list goes on. The american army is becoming quantity over quality.

T-55s, T-62s, T-72s, etc. all in capable hands vs. what, mock-ups and unmanned pieces of metal for the LeClerc?

M4A1 is a lot more versatile than the FAMAS and is a lot more accurate.

TOW is a design dating back to Vietnam and it is still a very potent anti-tank weapon

The F-15 is a generation behind the Rafale. The Rafale is in the same bracket of comparison as the F/A-22 and the Rafale loses in about 0.6 milliseconds.

Apache can hold a lot more weaponry than the Tiger. About the only thing the Tiget has over the Apache is that it is EMP-shielded.

The Mica is a piece of garbage that isn't nearly as capable as the latest AIM-120C-6 AMRAAM. The C-6 has a longer range, a better seeker, a heavier warhead, a faster speed, better ECCM, etc. Please the Mica is better than the RVV-AE Adder and that's about it in terms of active radar AAMs.

Im not gonna argue anything about the tanks...but...

I am gonna have to say that the FAMAS is not even comparable to the M4. Even if you came up with the slightest thing to pin against the M4 you would have to consider the M4's much more advanced offspring, most of which are used by US special forces, guns such as the: AR-47, Compak-16, M4 Reflex, and others from Armalite, Bushmaster, and Panther Arms as well as many more companies.

The only things I think are good about the French are there LeClerc's, which are ok, and some of their ships, most notably the Tourville class destroyers which are real nice.

Im not gonna argue anything about the tanks...but...

I am gonna have to say that the FAMAS is not even comparable to the M4. Even if you came up with the slightest thing to pin against the M4 you would have to consider the M4's much more advanced offspring, most of which are used by US special forces, guns such as the: AR-47, Compak-16, M4 Reflex, and others from Armalite, Bushmaster, and Panther Arms as well as many more companies.

The only things I think are good about the French are there LeClerc's, which are ok, and some of their ships, most notably the Tourville class destroyers which are real nice.

The only crappy part of the M4 is the .223 round. I like the .308 round of the M21/M24 better. The AK-47 is nice but it isn't that accurate past 300m.

The .223 round can have a velocity that exceeds the Browning .50 bullet, as well as the 7.62 AP round. But, if the 7.62 is a necessity, I would take either the M14 or the AR-47.

The .223 round can have a velocity that exceeds the Browning .50 bullet, as well as the 7.62 AP round. But, if the 7.62 is a necessity, I would take either the M14 or the AR-47.

The .223 has no stopping power unfortunately. It just goes through the victim. The .308 round knocks them down. Same with the 7.62 of the AR-47, that is a powerful round. Hell the .50-CAL doesn't need all that much velocity. It's like hitting a fly with a newspaper ya know...

Well, the .308 is a sniper round, unfortunatly.. and we are talking about assualt rifles.

The only way to truly prove you statement about the .223 is for me to shoot you with it and see if you get up. If a bullet goes through someone, that wound is going to bleed and bleed and hurt like hell. Personally, i think the rumors about what the US soldiers said in Somalia are not true at all.

((BTW, here are some pics of the AR-47 im talking about.. I wasnt meaning the AK-47...))

http://img72.photobucket.com/albums/v219/Rebel182/ar47car1.jpg

http://img72.photobucket.com/albums/v219/Rebel182/ar47car2.jpg

Well, the .308 is a sniper round, unfortunatly.. and we are talking about assualt rifles.

The only way to truly prove you statement about the .223 is for me to shoot you with it and see if you get up. If a bullet goes through someone, that wound is going to bleed and bleed and hurt like hell. Personally, i think the rumors about what the US soldiers said in Somalia are not true at all.

The .308 round is not just a sniper round. It can be used in assault rifles as well. You know for OEF they modified an M4 to carry the same ammunition as the AK-47 so that SF soldiers could use the clips of their terrorist victims for extra ammunition? And that's the picture you just posted lol!

I bet if you put a .223 through me I won't get up. But in the heat of combat when you shoot someone 5 times and you are trained how to drop the enemy with a single shot, there are problems. I also saw this video from Iraq of this nutso with an RPG. They put about four rounds through him from an M16, you can hear it in the BG, and it was only the final round, a headshot, that put the guy on the ground.

Well the man must have been high on Khat or something.. because I seriously doubt that that kind of occurance would be extremely rare.

Also, the AK ammo is the 7.62, or .30-06, not .308.

T-55s, T-62s, T-72s, etc. all in capable hands vs. what, mock-ups and unmanned pieces of metal for the LeClerc?

Even the occasional T-72, god save us. You use the generation gap in your later F-15 argument, but here, this makes it "battle tested"!

M4A1 is a lot more versatile than the FAMAS and is a lot more accurate.

Name one role the Famas cant fill. Versatility, my ass.

Also, more accurate? Thats just a lie. The Famas has a barrel the size of the M-16 one, with the body the same size as the M4a1, with the M4a1 stock not extended. The M4a1 has a range of 360m while the Famas has one of 450m. The Famas has a longer barrel and effective range than the M4a1, how exactly is the M4a1 more accurate?

TOW is a design dating back to Vietnam and it is still a very potent anti-tank weapon

And our soldiers still use it. The Bradley has a TOW launcher, The Humvee has a TOW launcher(not all obviously), the Apache has TOW capabilities. The M-16 dates back to vietnam too, but its still the US infantry arm.

The F-15 is a generation behind the Rafale. The Rafale is in the same bracket of comparison as the F/A-22 and the Rafale loses in about 0.6 milliseconds.

The F-15 is still the official air superiority fighter of america. The Rafale can be seen as better than the F-22(F/A, lol). The F-22 can only cary 8 missiles in stealth mode. The Rafale can carry 14. The Mica in addition can target enemy missiles, so in a long range engagement, the Rafale would be able to take out the F-22's missiles, then return fire.

By the time the F-22 is actually in service, most likely, passive radar will be in more common service. The Rafale will therefore be able to detect the F-22 when its fired upon, and return fire. Also, you can build from 3 to 7 Rafales for one F-22, depending on what the final cost ends up being for the F-22. A group of 12 F-22's going against 36 Rafales with passive radar would lose.

Apache can hold a lot more weaponry than the Tiger. About the only thing the Tiget has over the Apache is that it is EMP-shielded.

The Tiger is lighter(logistically better, etc), can carry as much as the Apache in certain loads(AT + AA, etc... 8 AT and 4 AA missiles), Faster, Longer range without outside fuel tanks, All the Apache has going for it is a superior AT payload? I would trust 8 HOt's with 1050-1450 penetration over the Hellfire with less than 900mm of penetration anyways.

The Mica is a piece of garbage that isn't nearly as capable as the latest AIM-120C-6 AMRAAM. The C-6 has a longer range, a better seeker, a heavier warhead, a faster speed, better ECCM, etc. Please the Mica is better than the RVV-AE Adder and that's about it in terms of active radar AAMs.

Shorter range(20 for AMRAAM, 28 for Mica), Similar seekers using active radar, A heavier total weight, a similar speed(mach 4 for both), and I would like to hear what you actually know about the mica ECCM?

Also, the AK ammo is the 7.62, or .30-06, not .308.

I dont believe I have ever heard of the AK-47 using a 30-06(7.62x63mm).

Because in WW2 we called it the .30-06. (or .30 caliber, like the browning, 7.62-.30 same thing)

a .30-06 is a 7.62x63mm, not any 7.62mm.

http://www.snipercentral.com/3006.htm

Yeah thats cool.. I wonder why I changed it to .30 Caliber......

Even the occasional T-72, god save us. You use the generation gap in your later F-15 argument, but here, this makes it "battle tested"!



Name one role the Famas cant fill. Versatility, my ass.

Also, more accurate? Thats just a lie. The Famas has a barrel the size of the M-16 one, with the body the same size as the M4a1, with the M4a1 stock not extended. The M4a1 has a range of 360m while the Famas has one of 450m. The Famas has a longer barrel and effective range than the M4a1, how exactly is the M4a1 more accurate?



And our soldiers still use it. The Bradley has a TOW launcher, The Humvee has a TOW launcher(not all obviously), the Apache has TOW capabilities. The M-16 dates back to vietnam too, but its still the US infantry arm.



The F-15 is still the official air superiority fighter of america. The Rafale can be seen as better than the F-22(F/A, lol). The F-22 can only cary 8 missiles in stealth mode. The Rafale can carry 14. The Mica in addition can target enemy missiles, so in a long range engagement, the Rafale would be able to take out the F-22's missiles, then return fire.

By the time the F-22 is actually in service, most likely, passive radar will be in more common service. The Rafale will therefore be able to detect the F-22 when its fired upon, and return fire. Also, you can build from 3 to 7 Rafales for one F-22, depending on what the final cost ends up being for the F-22. A group of 12 F-22's going against 36 Rafales with passive radar would lose.



The Tiger is lighter(logistically better, etc), can carry as much as the Apache in certain loads(AT + AA, etc... 8 AT and 4 AA missiles), Faster, Longer range without outside fuel tanks, All the Apache has going for it is a superior AT payload? I would trust 8 HOt's with 1050-1450 penetration over the Hellfire with less than 900mm of penetration anyways.



Shorter range(20 for AMRAAM, 28 for Mica), Similar seekers using active radar, A heavier total weight, a similar speed(mach 4 for both), and I would like to hear what you actually know about the mica ECCM?

You are right the T-72 is not on the same level as the M1 and there is the technology gap but it's battle proven. Put a MiG-21 in capable hands and it is going to do something. Now with that comparing the F-15 and the Rafale on terms of their role is just flat out impossible. The Rafale is going to beat the F-15 all across the board except maybe brute force. And as far as the Rafale beating the F-22. HA! The F-22 may only be able to carry 8 missiles but she can fly further, faster, and it'll fire before the Rafale even gets within range. The AIM-120C-6 has a range in excess of 40nm not 20. 27nm is the AIM-120A and that was reduced to about 20 in normal conditions. And the AIM-120 is not blind to targetting missiles either. Hell the AIM-54 had that capability in the A model in the early 1970s. And secondly, how are you going to target the missiles of the F-22 (AIM-120s use a lofted trajectory and don't go active until around 10nm from the target, at which point it is way too late). Heavier weight of the AIM-120 doesn't matter much as the missile has less drag than the 190-lb AIM-9 Sidewinder. ECCM systems employed on the AIM-120, so says every stinking place with information, are the best in the world. The only advantage of the Raf over the F-22 is it's cheaper than the F-22 (something like $180M or $225M a piece now). A group of 12 F-22s is going to slaughter 36 Rafale's. The Rafale's won't even know they are there. Passive radar won't help the Raf's much either because the APG-77 of the F-22 can be on and not be detected. Hell 12 F-22s can track and fire at all Rafales and then leave the AO just as quickly as they came in. In addition, F-22s will operate normally at 50k - 60k feet, flying supersonic. And you realize that F-22s will certainly have PR capabilities if they become a serious enough threat. Hell every plane with an RWR has passive capabilities.

Now onto the M4. Effective range of the M4 is 550m, accurate out to 550m, not 360m. They both use the same bullet, .223 REM. By the way, the FAMAS weighs a lot more. 8.38 lb versus 6.6 lb. Now with the FAMAS, optimum performance is only achieved with the French service ammunition, not NATO.

The Hellfire is not weak at all. It can take out T-80Us because of the way it attacks. It dives on the target from a loft and hits the top of the turret. Nothing is going to protect against that except ERA, maybe...

The Apache is brutal in air to air, air to ground, etc. The sheer might of it's cannon and armament in Longbow configuration make it a battlefield nightmare for the enemy. Yes it is heavier but it can fly 180 mph fully loaded versus 175 for the Tiger. Sorry 200 mph for the Tiger when it's clean. Loiter time for the Apache is 2hr 30min versus 2hr 50min for the Tiger. The AH-64 can climb higher and faster than the Tiger and carries more fuel internally and externally than the Tiger.

See it's sad that the most modern French equippment is barely on the same level as old US equippment. The Rafale may own the skies over the F-15s but armed with the AIM-120C-6 and AIM-9X that becomes and even match for the F-15s.

You are right the T-72 is not on the same level as the M1 and there is the technology gap but it's battle proven. Put a MiG-21 in capable hands and it is going to do something. Now with that comparing the F-15 and the Rafale on terms of their role is just flat out impossible. The Rafale is going to beat the F-15 all across the board except maybe brute force. And as far as the Rafale beating the F-22. HA! The F-22 may only be able to carry 8 missiles but she can fly further, faster, and it'll fire before the Rafale even gets within range.

The Rafale has a 300km larger combat radius than the F-22. The Rafale can fly faster than the F-22, and you underestimate the Rafale's radar.


The AIM-120C-6 has a range in excess of 40nm not 20. 27nm is the AIM-120A and that was reduced to about 20 in normal conditions.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/aim-120-specs.htm

I've haerd of the Aim-120C-7 having more range, but not the C-6.

And the AIM-120 is not blind to targetting missiles either. Hell the AIM-54 had that capability in the A model in the early 1970s.

I dont see the point of this comment, really.

And secondly, how are you going to target the missiles of the F-22 (AIM-120s use a lofted trajectory and don't go active until around 10nm from the target, at which point it is way too late).

Passive radar will light those missiles up and fire the aircrafts own missiles to intercept. Bam. 0 missiles for the f-22, 6 left for the Rafale. F-22 better try to outrun the faster Rafale.

Heavier weight of the AIM-120 doesn't matter much as the missile has less drag than the 190-lb AIM-9 Sidewinder.

F-22 uses internal bays, so drag doesnt matter. If you use lighter missiles, you can have heavier other things.

ECCM systems employed on the AIM-120, so says every stinking place with information, are the best in the world.

Ohh, well, I guess it must be true if you saw it!

The only advantage of the Raf over the F-22 is it's cheaper than the F-22 (something like $180M or $225M a piece now).

F-22 is coming to be from $150 to 350 billion.

A group of 12 F-22s is going to slaughter 36 Rafale's. The Rafale's won't even know they are there. Passive radar won't help the Raf's much either because the APG-77 of the F-22 can be on and not be detected.

I havnt heard of APG-77 protecting from newer passive radars. But even if it did, the Aim-120C's are still vulnerable, so they will be shot down. So the F-22's have to go back or land, and the Rafales can still fight. The F-22 simply isnt that good.

Hell 12 F-22s can track and fire at all Rafales and then leave the AO just as quickly as they came in. In addition, F-22s will operate normally at 50k - 60k feet, flying supersonic. And you realize that F-22s will certainly have PR capabilities if they become a serious enough threat. Hell every plane with an RWR has passive capabilities.

And the missiles will be shot down, and the Rafales will be in control of the skies. I dont even see your point about how high the F-22's fly.

Now onto the M4. Effective range of the M4 is 550m, accurate out to 550m, not 360m. They both use the same bullet, .223 REM. By the way, the FAMAS weighs a lot more. 8.38 lb versus 6.6 lb. Now with the FAMAS, optimum performance is only achieved with the French service ammunition, not NATO.

http://www.world.guns.ru/assault/as17-e.htm
http://www.world.guns.ru/assault/as21-e.htm

And yes, the M4a1 weighs less. Doesnt really matter though, when its less capable of doing its job. Also, NATO ammunition works fine in the Famas.

The Hellfire is not weak at all. It can take out T-80Us because of the way it attacks. It dives on the target from a loft and hits the top of the turret. Nothing is going to protect against that except ERA, maybe...

The Hellfire is rated at >>900 armour penetration, and ERA can protect against it. HOT has 1050-1250(some have gone so far as 1450 for claims), and ERA doesnt affect it. If you want to just go with top attack capabilities, then most AT weapons can penetrate the top. Hellfires dont have guaranteed top attack capability, could easily hit the turret, etc, and be useless. HOT would penetrate almost any part of any tank.

The Apache is brutal in air to air, air to ground, etc. The sheer might of it's cannon and armament in Longbow configuration make it a battlefield nightmare for the enemy. Yes it is heavier but it can fly 180 mph fully loaded versus 175 for the Tiger. Sorry 200 mph for the Tiger when it's clean. Loiter time for the Apache is 2hr 30min versus 2hr 50min for the Tiger. The AH-64 can climb higher and faster than the Tiger and carries more fuel internally and externally than the Tiger.

So you say about the speed, but I dont see anything to back that up. The apache has a range of 400km while the Tiger has 800km. Carrying more fuel doesnt mean much, range is range. The Apache has a speed of 173mph top, the Tiger has 179mph. Both carry 30mm cannons, and the French missiles are superior to American ones. Tiger has an endurance of 3 hours 25 minutes, so its more than the Apache. Claims about climb are useless, as I dont believe that eurocopter has given out the information about the Tiger climb speed or ceiling. Its not on their site or any other I can find.

See it's sad that the most modern French equippment is barely on the same level as old US equippment. The Rafale may own the skies over the F-15s but armed with the AIM-120C-6 and AIM-9X that becomes and even match for the F-15s.

Its sad to see the americans try so hard to claim they are good, when supposedly wussy countries beat their even overpriced military equipment like the F-22.

According to Janes Book of Guns (Circa 2002) The FAMAS works best with the French ammunition, not NATO. This fact as well as the weight issue would probably force NATO standards to pick the M4. The M4 has a greater range than the FAMAS G-1 model.. but not the G2.. that gun is probably newer than the M4 anyway so it would have to compete with the M4's successors (some of which I listed above).

According to Janes Book of Guns (Circa 2002) The FAMAS works best with the French ammunition, not NATO. This fact as well as the weight issue would probably force NATO standards to pick the M4. The M4 has a greater range than the FAMAS G-1 model.. but not the G2.. that gun is probably newer than the M4 anyway so it would have to compete with the M4's successors (some of which I listed above).

Like the XM8, which has an even shorter barrel than the M4a1? I'd prefer it going up against that than the M4a1, lol.

You would prefer the G2 to go up against... what.. the newer M4s?

You would prefer the G2 to go up against... what.. the newer M4s?

No, the crappy XM8's.

It doesnt matter though. The Famas g2 appeared in 1994, same as the M4 carbine, not even the M4a1.

An armed nation looking for more arms... Aye Aye!

Jombo Fatalot
Right wing fascist party

Im sorry, but the M4A1 Carbine first appeared in 1984, as a direct descendant of the CAR-15. So, therefore, the G2 is a much newer gun than the M4 and would have to go up against the M4's more technologically advanced successors.

Im sorry, but the M4A1 Carbine first appeared in 1984, as a direct descendant of the CAR-15. So, therefore, the G2 is a much newer gun than the M4 and would have to go up against the M4's more technologically advanced successors.

I'd like to take a no to that...

What do you think american soldiers used in somalia? Not the M4a1. Car-15's, XM-177's, etc.

http://www.world.guns.ru/assault/as17-e.htm

1994.

No, thats when the Army ADOPTED it, Janes says the production of the US M4 Carbines goes back to 1984.

They were Car-15's before that. M4a1 was changed to m4a1 at or after 1994.

A CAR-15 basically is a M4. I bet that after Vietnam Colt fixed the CAR-15's flaws and put it back into production as the M4 in 1984.

A CAR-15 basically is a M4. I bet that after Vietnam Colt fixed the CAR-15's flaws and put it back into production as the M4 in 1984.

Post some proof if you feel so inclined.

From my info, the M4a1 was only created after the army adopted the M4 in 1994, as they wanted to change some things. So even if the M4 was 1984, which im still unsure about, M4a1 is post-1994.

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=335357


or click my signature

The People's Republic of Drabikstan is currently seeking arms suppliers. Drabikstan requires small arms, armoured vehicles, tanks, helicopters, communications equipment and fighter jets (ground attack and interceptors). Drabikstan only has a limited military budget and therefore, is interested in purchasing older Soviet-built weapons.


DRABIKSTAN MILITARY STATS:
Military manpower - availability:
males age 15-49: 812,140 (2004 est.)

Military manpower - fit for military service:
males age 15-49: 649,568 (2004 est.)

Military manpower - reaching military age annually:
males: 31,926 (2004 est.)

Military expenditures - dollar figure:
$160 million

Military expenditures - percent of GDP:
6.5%

Drabikstan's Defence Ministry understands the constraints that the newly independent republic faces. Therefore, the initial costs of purchasing such weapons will no doubt force increased military spending.

Drabikstan's state owned arms firm DRABIKSTANDEFENCE will handle any arms purchases and transfers. Please reply with any offers.

Thankyou

:sniper:

The M4 and M4A1 are the same thing.. and im still looking for a site for proof right now.

Well, I cant find anything saying it would go either way... but im gonna suppose that Janes has a typo and it is 1994 as the production started.

But, I will say that the M4 (M4A1) is a directed decendant of the CAR-15.

Well, I cant find anything saying it would go either way... but im gonna suppose that Janes has a typo and it is 1994 as the production started.

But, I will say that the M4 (M4A1) is a directed decendant of the CAR-15.

There are changes car-15 to M4, as well as changes M4 to m4a1. Small, but still there.

Thats why I said that the M4 is a direct DECENDANT of the CAR-15.

The M4 and M4A1 are the same thing. Nothing is different about the two, just that M4 is the common short name since no one wants to say M4A1 all the time.

Thats why I said that the M4 is a direct DECENDANT of the CAR-15.

The M4 and M4A1 are the same thing. Nothing is different about the two, just that M4 is the common short name since no one wants to say M4A1 all the time.

Wrong. a1 is generally given when revisions were made. M1 carbine was different than the m1a1, m1 abhrams was not m1a1, a1 denotes revision.

Check my previous link at world.guns.ru, it says that.