Article Archive: Current 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics
Weapons: Dutch Infantry Work Their Rifles To Death
   Next Article → SUPPORT: Bureaucrats Lose Another Big One
February 7, 2009: Dutch troops in southern Afghanistan are getting the first extended combat workout in over half a century. This has caused expected wear and tear on equipment and weapons. The Netherlands is using the need to refurbish many of their weapons, as an opportunity to upgrade them as well. Thus M-16 and M-4 assault rifles are not only having worn parts replaced, but are having standard rails (which allow quick attachment of sights and other gear) added, as well as the "red dot" sights that U.S. troops have found so useful. By replacing the traditional cross-hairs (which are actually hard to see), with a more visible red dot, troops can get off a more accurate shot more quickly and more often. The rifles will also have minor (but popular and combat tested) changes made to the butt stock, fire selector and magazine release.
Next Article → SUPPORT: Bureaucrats Lose Another Big One
  

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
FlyingDutchman       2/7/2009 2:50:24 PM
Nice to see an article about the Netherlands.
 
Too bad it's inaccurate.
 
The Dutch army uses the Diemaco C7, C8 and LOAW.
Maybe some of the special forces use other weapons, but predominately it'll be Diemaco's.
 
Too bad the rest of the Dutch armed forces get's cut back more and more to pay for Afghanistan and other places.
The purchase of the JSF is also still not sure.
It's also possible the initial buy of 85 will be cut back to 40/50ish.  
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY    Flying Dutchman   2/7/2009 7:05:42 PM
Dude:
1) the C-7/8 are basically M-16's and M-4's aren't they?  If the action is the same, it's an M-16, isn't it?  If the only differences are in sights, or hardware, then it's not that much of aa difference, they certainly look like M-16's and M-4's in photos.
2) You FOOLS,  EVERYONE KNOWS THE M-16 SUCKS ROCKS!  You should be using the Ak-47/Galil/R-4/HK 416/G-36/G-3/FN-FAL...but not the M-16.  Remember it sucks....
 
Quote    Reply

maruben    The Question should be   2/9/2009 1:47:15 PM
 
Quote    Reply

FlyingDutchman       2/10/2009 2:46:18 PM
 
Quote    Reply

jic       2/12/2009 10:08:24 AM

Why are they using the Canadian Rifles and not the American made? Please information.

 


  • http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cf/Flag_of_Canada.svg/22px-Flag_of_Canada.svg.png" width="22" height="11" /> Canada
  • http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9c/Flag_of_Denmark.svg/22px-Flag_of_Denmark.svg.png" width="22" height="17" /> Denmark
  • http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c3/Flag_of_France.svg/22px-Flag_of_France.svg.png" width="22" height="15" /> France
  • http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ce/Flag_of_Iceland.svg/22px-Flag_of_Iceland.svg.png" width="22" height="16" /> Iceland
  • http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg/22px-Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg.png" width="22" height="15" /> Netherlands
  • http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d9/Flag_of_Norway.svg/22px-Flag_of_Norway.svg.png" width="22" height="16" /> Norway
  • http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg/22px-Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg.png" width="22" height="11" /> United Kingdom

  •  


    As I understand it, there were two main reasons: the Canadian version had full-auto fire as standard, and they were cheaper.  There are also some very minor diferences in things like sights and handgrips.  Otherwise, they are essentially identical to the American rifles, and are built under license from Colt.
     
    Quote    Reply

    strat-T21C       2/13/2009 3:30:56 PM

    Dude:

    1) the C-7/8 are basically M-16's and M-4's aren't they?  If the action is the same, it's an M-16, isn't it?  If the only differences are in sights, or hardware, then it's not that much of aa difference, they certainly look like M-16's and M-4's in photos.

    2) You FOOLS,  EVERYONE KNOWS THE M-16 SUCKS ROCKS!  You should be using the Ak-47/Galil/R-4/HK 416/G-36/G-3/FN-FAL...but not the M-16.  Remember it sucks....



     
    Quote    Reply

    strat-T21C       2/13/2009 3:42:47 PM
    Let's see if this works this time! The C-7/C-8 series is pretty mutch the same as M16/M-4. There hase been some structual work in the forestock and the butt to make it more robust for the extreams in weather in Canada along with some tweeking internally for the same reasons. The rifle is reliable and acurate and beat out the competition duing the trials.
     
    Quote    Reply

    jic       2/16/2009 9:18:19 PM

    There hase been some structual work in the forestock and the butt to make it more robust for the extreams in weather in Canada along with some tweeking internally for the same reasons.
    Wouldn't the US Army face those same extremes of weather in Alaska?  Hell, in Minnesota?
     
    Quote    Reply