I have mixed feelings about the SA80, outside weighing too much for an assault rifle the A2/A3 have been reliable but the A1 taints my ability to appreciate the 1990s UK military, like even if the Gulf War was largely just artillery duels and air strikes I find it so hard to fathom the idea of our government sending thousands of frontline troops to a battlefield with a rifle that has a 50/50 chance of not working for years on end without bothering to do anything about it. People say the money spent repairing the SA80 could've been spent on a whole new rifle and I agree with them. We could've went with the FNC, AUG, M16/M4 or G36.. But now that we're here what is actually likely to replace it? I get that Project Grayburn is in the early days but it's frustrating how vague the answers I've been given are, the most I know is that Beretta are considering making an entry but outside of that it's the same surface level guestimating about us copying the NGSW (fat chance) or adopting a new calibre. Why not a 5.56 rifle like literally every other NATO member?

>>63884762 (OP)
>now that we're here what is actually likely to replace it?
The majority of European countries in NATO are buying HK 416.

>>63884785
Yeah and that would be neato but our government likes to be quirky and ignore the trends of the rest of Europe

'I cant believe its not an HK416' by any euro manufacturer other than H&K

>>63884762 (OP)
I like it in F02 and CoD MW2.

>>63884762 (OP)
My bet is on either expanded orders of the new KAC rifle or more C7s/C8s. They're expensive, but the British military isn't very big anyway so it shouldn't cost that much to issue them to all of their frontline troops and their special forces already have them.

>>63884762 (OP)
An AR-15 derivative

>>63884850
The question is which one

>>63884843
>new KAC rifle
Doubtful
>more C7s/C8s
Maybe but I think whatever they adopt it'll be unproven and exotic

>>63884855
It'll be a coilgun.

>INB4 the bongs defy all reasonable and logical expectations, and adopt something truly bizarre and completely unproven, chambered for some new proprietary cartridge that no one has ever heard of before

>>63884851
The KS-1. They are already buying 10,000 of them, so unless there is some major war where they need large quantities of rifles, or Knights runs into major production problems and can't fulfill orders, that seems to be the path of least resistance for new rifles.

>>63884877
Absolutely not.
The Knights rifles replaced existing ARs in British service.
The Brits made it crystal clear that this is a one time purchase to equip elite troops, and they have no intention what so ever to issue these rifles on a wider scale since they're far too expensive.
If they do issue AR-platform rifles to replace all the old SA-80s, then we'd expect them to a much cheaper model of rifle.
Probably a slightly cheapened H&K416 knock-off as stated previously in the thread, with the Haenel MK 556 or Rheinmetall/Steyr RS556 being possible contenders.

>>63884874
They go back and adopt the EM-2?

>>63884919
Replying to myself.
Forgot to mention that the M4A1 is also a legitimate contender here, if the budget constraint is tight enough.

>>63884874
>22" barrel KRISS Vector in 6.8
>firing modes are 2, and 4 round burst
>fixed 8x thermal sight (with built in crank to charge the batteries)
>12" folding spike bayonet

>>63884874
That would be based tbqh

They could also just rechamber their L85's into 6.8mm cause fuck it, fourth times the charm?

>>63884919
>Rheinmetall/Steyr RS556
That would legitimately go hard desu, even if they’re 20-30 years old I would like to see M4s as well though

>>63884793
>our government likes to be quirky and ignore the trends of the rest of Europe
Except they haven't; the SAS is using things like the HK 416, the C8, and the SIG MCX Spear. Should the standard troops need to switch their service rifle, it'll be something like one of those two.

>>63884874
I don't think they are interested in the M7 (NGSW).

why was the last thread purged?
>>63884785
I wonder how long it will be before the army swallows its pride and adopts the M27 or some other variation of it. The XM7 is an abomination.

>>63884850
This

>>63884762 (OP)
Do just an AR15, like the Royal Marines are already using.

>>63884785
>>63885019
I hate the 416, either get a real AR15, or get another gun actually designed around a piston. SCAR, G36, AUG, VHS2, any of those would be better.

>>63884988
I must imagine the SAS aren't loving the Sig Spear.

>>63884874
>>63884931
>>63884942
>>63884948
>>63885002
Got to leave the computer for a while.
Can you guys please help me finish this handy chart of possible options/features for the new standard service rifle?

>>63885019
>M27
You mean the upgraded HK 416.

>>63885072
>G36
Anon, the HK 416 is a straight upgrade over the G36. The only reason it exists was because the G36 was lacking.
>I must imagine the SAS aren't loving the Sig Spear.
They are not; unfortunately, the ones who select what weapon gets adopted usually aren't the ones who use the weapon in the field.

>>63885078
>Madsen action
>manual repeater
>.577
this is a fantastic idea

Why would we adopt an American gun? Arn't you leaving NATO soon to join up with Russia?

>>63885258
Braindead.

>>63885078
I'm back!
Edited this for clarity, to make it clear you're supposed to pick and choose options, not just read each line horizontally.
Still need more suggestions, so anyone who wants to add something is more than welcome to do so.

>>63884877
KAC couldn't make enough to equip an entire army even if they wanted to.

>>63884785
Nords, swedes, and whoever is up there all contracted out to CZ Colt for well over 100k m4s. These are recent contracts.

>>63885547
Good, Eugene Stoner supremacy. No matter which company people go with. 10/10

>>63885547
It was Sweden that purchased 15,000 of them as a stop gap solution.
Their own domestic AR variant is being manufactured by Sako in Finland, but the Finns can't produce them fast enough.
The M4A1s will be used to train conscripts until sufficient numbers of AK24s are available.
It's unclear how the carbines will be employed afterwards, but it's widely speculated they'll be issued to the home guard.

These M4A1 carbines weren't purchased directly from the manufacturer.
They were purchased from the US government and pulled out of the US Army's stockpile of new-old-stock.
As far as I'm aware this batch includes both Colt and FN rifles.

Pic one of the M4A1s Sweden purchased. With the typical issued accessories.

>>63885002
They were interested enough to develop the cartridge for it 60+ years ago before Studler had a protectionist shitfit and sent NATO around the houses

>>63884850

>>63884785
either 416 or that new KAC ar15 they got for commandos

>>63884762 (OP)
LMT MARS in 6.8x51.

After having a chance to look at some of the proposed budgets would not be surprised if they start going back to the Martini Henry

>>63887294
Love photos like this.
The stories all these rifles could tell of how they ended up where they did and the battles and wars they were part of.

>>63884785
>The majority of European countries in NATO are buying HK 416.
You keep saying this, and it's just not true. We're not in 2016 anymore.

>>63886909
>LMT MARS in 6.8x51
Keep dreaming

>>63887312
I remember there was a story about a British army officer who went to see some village chief and on the wall of his home as a trophy was a service rifle from the same Bong regiment the officer was a part of from hundred years prior during one of the Anglo-Afghan wars. Was quite a flex on the village chief part.

>>63887334
Couple generations later and his grandsons will probably be doing the same with M16s and M4s.
The region really is a graveyard of military attrition.
>When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains,
>And the women come out to cut up what remains,
>Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains
>An' go to your Gawd like a soldier.

>>63887323
I think I've mentioned it twice this entire year, but I'm sure that even if I'm wrong on the 416, whatever does get chosen will have some of Eugene Stoner's divine inspiration.

I remember hearing some rumours not too long ago that there was interest regarding the CZ Bren for some trials.

>>63884762 (OP)
you will use american guns and you will like it. heck, this gun doesn't deserve to be used with dirty ass indo-british hands

>>63884793
>but our government likes to be quirky and ignore the trends of the rest of Europe
Then just adopt a new bullpup (a bullpup that actually works) if you insist on being a bunch of special snowflakes.

>>63887495
Probably some MCX clone

>>63887926
Both the British and the Swedes tried the MCX and were left disappointed. Ron Cohen can seemingly ruin any gun company.

>>63888000
I am stunned that my government made a decision which was actually competent.

>>63884762 (OP)
It's a bad time to do a small arms replacement program, because it's not clear what's going to happen with ammo technology, or generally with infantry loadouts. Countries with aging fleets who are due for a SARP, like the UK, really want to be able to see if 6.8x51 gets momentum and performs well, and want to make some serious decisions about drone loads and command structure in the world of infantry, before picking anything.

The basic idea of slow rolling the program with a long fact finding and requirements analysis phase that starts, like, next year or whatever, is sound. The mean time ought to be spent working out which is the cart and which is the horse between drones and firearms for infantry, because everything else should flow from that decision.

>>63888025
>if 6.8x51 gets momentum and performs well
It doesn't.

>>63888054
>Just trust me bro.
I don't.

>>63884874
>picrel
>but 6mm
>in rimless .303 case
>using true velocity style plastic cases

I thought the Brits already decided on the Knights Armaments KS-1?

So a flavor of AR-15, basically.

>>63888561
That's a singular contract for SOF. KAC doesn't even have the production capacity to outfit the entire UK military, don't be ridiculous.

>>63885722
Anyone know what sling that is?

>>63888590

The entire British Regular Army has only like 18,000 infantrymen. The current contract for up to 10,000 rifles can literally equip more than half of them.

>>63885448
>Gatling system
>Electric motor
>Gyrojet rocket ball
>Calico drums
Talk me out of it.

>>63885448
If we've already got loose powder and shot, why can't we have a wheel lock for the action type or method of operation? I think wheel locks are cool.

>>63884762 (OP)
I think the KS-1 has a really good shot of making it.

>>63884762 (OP)
Just adopt C7s and be done with it + Commonwealth commonality is cool

>>63885078
>trounds
Unironically thought this was the bullet equivalent of a thruppence until I looked it up

>>63884762 (OP)
Wasn't there buzz around 6.5 Creedmoor being on the table? I have faith the bongs will adopt something strange and break up the monotony of 556 ARslop.

>>63884762 (OP)
Will the US get parts kits?

>>63885078
>>63885448
Don't forget one more important criteria: Does it look good in a parade?

>>63888930
...Anon, the Brits would genuinely rather disperse the rifles to random Arabs on the streets of London than even consider selling parts kits to American civilians.

>>63889044
so sick of everything being gay

>>63888453
Oh god yes. All I would change is the TV case for careless or telescoping ammunition

>>63884762 (OP)
Britain has got M7 and M250 for testing 6.8x51, they're also taking a look at 6.5 Creedmoor AR's and newer 5.56 guns. This early phase of replacing the SA80 is taking a look at what the US is doing with battle rifles.
Which is huge
If the brits see validity in 6.8x51 it's gunna be huge for NATO and the US. But it's more likely they'll either stay with 5.56 or lean into 6.5 creedmore

>>63888025
No it isn't.
The Brits are going to be the deciding factor if 6.8x51 becomes viable

>>63888914
>>63889085
Why the sudden interest in sneedmoor? I know they adopted a marksman rifle chambered in it, but I wouldn't have thought they'd consider it for a service rifle too.

>>63889085
I could see them sticking with 5.56 on cost alone. And honestly that's fine, I still don't buy all the rationale behind the .277 round, 5.56 is fine for most applications, especially out of the longer barrels the British have with their bullpups.

>>63889103
The britsh marksman rifle is in 7.62 unless there's another one I'm unaware of

>>63889103
SOCOM and a few NATO allies are already using it, and there is a good amount of excess case capacity to push the envelope like 6.8x51 is doing but with a better projo

>>63889112
The L129A1 (pictured there) takes 7.62 NATO but the A2 variant is chambered in 6.5 Creedmoor.

>>63889108
If no ally follows up into 6.8x51 - then it ends and doesn't get NATO adoption. M7 program canceled, both guns sitting in arms rooms rotting

>>63885054
>>63884850
The AR-18 is the kindest rifle. It insists its children dress up as AR-15 so that it won't feel bad about its incurable flatulence.

>>63889117
I didn't even know there was an A2 varient, we've got the A1's. Reading up on it it seems it might just be for the Marines /rangers at the moment

>>63884850
This.
But honestly it depresses me, Yeah the A1's were dogshit, it's heavy for a 5.56mm rifle, the weight is centred towards the back of the rifle which doesn't help with recoil (but does help when you're just cradling it), it can't be shot left handed and the L86 was rubbish in the LMG role.
But after all the redo's and updates it's a pretty good rifle now and honestly it's so fucking gay that everything needs to be an AR-15 now. There's no variety anymore, no one it trying anything new.

The thing that really pisses me off is the fact that I guarantee the rifles won't even be manufactured in the UK and it won't even be a UK specific variant like the L1A1 was. You can already see the direction they're going with SAS, SBS, SRR, SFSG with the L119A1/A2, the Royal Marines(?) going with the MCX and the para's and similar now going with the KS-1.

TL;DR it will undoubtedly be an off-the-shelf AR-15 clone that's not even manufactured in this country, and if it's from Sig Sauer it will be fucking shit and we'll probably be in an L85A1 situation again.

>>63888362
>soldiers trialing it say they see no purpose in the cartridge and that being able to only carry 100rds sucks really fucking hard actually
Yeah. Trust me, bro.

test

>>63888664
Surely it's not THAT bad?

>>63885722
Are there any more pictures of the Swedish M4s? I can’t find anything very article talking about it uses some other army for the picture

>>63890659
All three services combined only comes to 180,780

>>63891116
>AI overview
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/how-many-soldiers-are-in-each-british-army-regiment/

there's also infantry in artillery, signals, engineers, armoured corps logistics and medical, but their status doesn't put them as "infantry" role but instead a special one, mind you i only took actual combat role, not the POG that stay in base like musical corps

>>63891135
It's taken straight from the Defence journal though.
>and if we count all the non-infantry roles its actually much more
No shit.

>>63885019
I want the U.S. to swap to the RM277 so that we’ll have a bullpup while everyone else is swapping to the German version of an AR-15.
Also, instead of the 6.8mm, we should adopt the .280 British, but alter the bottleneck and bullet length very slightly and call it the .280 American for maximum fuckery.

>>63892234
That would really retarded, but it would also actually be the funniest fucking thing ever.

>>63890517
>soldiers doing range practice provide comment on terminal effects
Ask me how I know all of your opinions are based on worthless information.

>>63892287
I'll spell it out for you, you little hypermongoloid, you.

In field exercises, which is something grunts also do, they do not find themselves using the rifle's extended range much at all (big shock), and being able to carry less than half the normal ammo with more than thrice the recoil is a really shitty tradeoff that they don't see as useful.
This is in addition to the stupid gimmick scope just breaking randomly, the rifle shooting as bad as +6MOA, or the the support weapon's chamber refusing to let go of fired cases (or the frequency of cases bursting).

I know that the British are really fond of the SA80, but this rifle would suck way too much, even for you, half of these problems are not fixable.

>>63889044
It's time to turn the tables. If the British government will not sell their surplus to Americans willingly, than we must take their surplus by force!

>>63892354
...Do we really want those shitty things? I know "muh aesthetic" and all but...man.

>>63885078
Bullpup
Top mounted mag
Wood stock
Side mounted mag
Forward pump action charging handle
Krag style internal mag
Side mounted mag (right side)

>>63892372
For a parts kit, you would be rebuilding the receiver anyway, which is one of the important parts to replace. Also, a lot of the guns were already rebuilt as L85A2, and some as L85A3, I think that the majority of the rifles in British inventory have been rebuilt/upgraded.

>>63884850
>replacing a botched ar18 with a properly made ar15
At the end of the day stoner chads keep winning

>>63892372
>>63892397
Most likely, the Brits aren't going to surplus or even scrap their fleet of SA80s, the A2s and A3s actually work, and I imagine that they probably intend to hold on to them as emergency reserves or/and for potential foreign military aid.

>>63885722
>the Finns can't produce them fast enough.
Wrong. Sweden and Fingolia bought pic related as DMR's in 7.62 NATO to replace Dragunovs and whatever DMR the Swedes were using, but the basic bitch infantry rifle is still in the design / testing phase to figure out the preferred barrel length & what bells and whistles they want on the guns. + they want to iron out all the kinks first, before they blow millions setting up big boy production lines only to then realize they fucked something up and the guns are defective somehow. The Swedes already claim to have hangfire problems with their test guns.

>>63884762 (OP)
Aren't the royal marines or SAS using some new LWRC AR?

>>63893133
>and whatever DMR the Swedes were using
We may still have been using the those 'modernized' AK4s in some capacity, though it's possible we sent all of those to the Home Guard.

>but the basic bitch infantry rifle is still in the design / testing phase to figure out the preferred barrel length & what bells and whistles they want on the guns.
Oh, maybe it's still time to prevent the short-stroke piston mistake?

>+ they want to iron out all the kinks first, before they blow millions setting up big boy production lines only to then realize they fucked something up and the guns are defective somehow. The Swedes already claim to have hangfire problems with their test guns.
Hangfires? As in the primers delaying before touching off the powder? I could only imagine that this would be ammunition related, unless perhaps the primer strikes are right at the absolute twilight between firing and not working at all.

Unless you mean something else, but hangfires to me is when you pull the trigger, it goes click, then half a second later (or even many seconds later), it finally goes bang. Ergo sketchy as fuck surplus ammo.

>>63892295
>no mention of terminal ballistics, the reason for the existence of the round, anywhere
You don't need to keep telling everyone that you're a retard.

>>63893301
The retarded and imaginary reason?

>>63893133
>but the basic bitch infantry rifle is still in the design / testing phase

For the Finns, yes.
For the Swedes, no.

The swedes have already finalized the AK24 (pic) as their new standard infantry rifle.
They'll most likely also pick a new 7.62x51mm DMR, but that's still in the testing phase.

The Swedish contract rifles suffering form hangfire issues aren't prototypes in the test phase, the prototypes all worked.
The rifles having issues are from the first batch of mass produced rifles.

>>63884967
original 4.85 mm is best mm

>>63894971
The craziest thing about the SA80 is that they spent like a decade making these 4.85mm rifles, got them running, then completely scrapped the whole thing, starting over from scratch to make the SA80 that we all know and hate today.

>>63884762 (OP)
Some AR slop.

>>63893294
>Unless you mean something else, but hangfires to me is when you pull the trigger, it goes click, then half a second later (or even many seconds later), it finally goes bang. Ergo sketchy as fuck surplus ammo.
It could also be something fucky about second stage triggers, where the hammer gets somehow stuck on the disco again after being released by the sear.

>>63884850
>stoner chads won the small arms race, and it wasn't even close

>>63884839
God the LSW and the Bozor in FO2 were so fucking great. L85 in fallout tactics was pretty gud too if my memory serves.

>>63889973
Rear heavy is good. Infantrymen are forced to mount stuff to the front of the rifle, zo the weight balances out.

>>63884850
Someone is making a kit that makes brn-180's look like SA80s.

>>63884762 (OP)
I think an Australian-style modernised AUG could work nicely. Retains bullpup size/performance ratio and prior training in a package that actually works and has proven very compatible with upgrades.

>>63884762 (OP)
Dubs and they adopt the AKB-23

>>63884762 (OP)
Digits and they'll adopt an AK

>>63884762 (OP)
they are gonna go for the hk416 like every other nato military
>>63889123
could they in theory convert the m7 into the 5.56x45/762x51 if 6.8x51 fails

>>63897932
>could they in theory convert the m7 into the 5.56x45/762x51 if 6.8x51 fails
Maybe? But why? It's not a good rifle, it's extremely shitty, it shoots 6MOA and comes with crooked barrels from the factory.
Converting to 5.56mm would be even more retarded, since it's a 7.62mm sized gun.

>>63897932
>7.62x51mm
Yes, I think more of the commercial semi-auto rifles have .308 barrels than 6.8 barrels.
>5.56x45mm
Converting down to an intermediate caliber is not practical, plus the MCX Spear LT is already the 5.56 version of it.
Also, rebarreling the guns still doesn't fix many of the problems or superfluous "improvements" of the gun which have been discussed to death. The 5.56 MCX was not decisively better than regular ARs to begin with, and these guns do not deserve any further investment beyond throwing them into storage or selling them as surplus sans the lower receivers.

>>63884762 (OP)
Watch them adopt the M7 and spark a wave of seethe from 5.56lets that the battle rifle is back

>>63898014
Why would you want a battle rifle in a bad cartridge? Go for 7.62mm NATO or go home. Unless you want to upgrade to something like a hypothetical 7.x51mm NATO or something.

>>63897932
>spend millions in R&D and procurement just to convert the rifle to calibers fired by masses of guns you already have in inventory.
That's retarded enough that it just might happen. What actually will happen though is that they keep pushing this flawed 'every infantryman needs to defeat body armour and hit targets at long range with single shots' idea until it faces an actual war and everyone starts asking for 5.56m rifles back.

>>63887843
ey das true holmes, fuck dese gringos mayne, dey shold be usin our gons meng

>>63887525
I'm hoping we adopt the Bren. Either that or the VHS-2 (idk if HS Produckt has the manufacturing capacity for it though)

>all this arguing with underage, 18 yo yankee boy sissies and pissrael worshipping boomers.

To set the record straight; the SA80 came to be because the factory and engineers who designed a manufactured it turned the AR-18 into a bullpup to get around patent laws (also the MOD wanted a cheap bullpup). Since they knew they were out of a job after they had built the gun, the quality of the design and manufacture reflected the black hole of morale the workers had.

This board is unironically full of NATOniggers, Turkroaches, Russniggers, kikes, chinks and the bottom of the barrel nu/k/ poster.

>TL:DR YOU ARE ALL NIGGERS AND SOME OF YOU ARE NIGGER SHILLS DO NOT REPLY TO ME DO NOT QUOTE ME I WILL NOT RESPOND FUCK THIS THREAD FUCK THIS BOARD AND MOST OF ALL FUCK YOU

>>63897951
>>63897963
>>63898577
imo its gonna end up like m14 adopted for a few years and thats it
>m4a1s/ar15 to mars baby

>>63887922
I don’t work for the MoD so I have no say in the matter lol. But obviously everyone knows the SA80 works it’s just been unable to shake its reputation, and as much good bull pup designs as there are is honestly rather we go with a conventional design. Neither of us have any control over this and it’s hardly about being special snowflakes it’s just looking at our governments way of handling these procurements

>>63900195
It's not, because the M14 was ultimately adequate at being a full powered battle rifle, while the Sig Spear is actually really fucking bad at this.
Again, the Spear shoots 6 FUCKING MOA, that's insane, there's random 91/30 garbage rods out there which group better than this.

>>63897896
SAS bought AUG's in the past and the Falkland Islands Defence Force and at least one other Caribbean protectorate use the AUG.

Britain's really looking into 6.8 and 6.5 creed but I gotta imagine they're not exactly thrilled about following the US into becoming a 4/5 caliber army (6.8x51, 7 62x51 in guns that can't be converted like miniguns, 9mm, .309bo, and legacy 5.56 for 2nd line troops)

>>63892589
Actually they probably will eventually, they scrapped and sold their L1A1's after the L85A2 project was complete.
They'll probably go to crown protectorates like the Bermuda defense force and such

>>63885019
I'd rather the Army keep the M4 and just drop the KAC handguards and go for MLOK.
Also restart M16A5

>>63900512
>is honestly
I'd honestly*

>>63884785
They are going to get some semi-commodity AR-15 with current bling because HK will refuse to compromise and stroke/kickback/pad the connected people in purchasing. Partly because they can't (government oversight), also perversity. The result will be fine tbqh - but unremarkable.

>>63901504
Yeah, the M14 was a marksman's gun given to the rank and file, but still an adequate marksman's gun for the Cold War/WoT. M7 is conceptually shit on every level, even without getting into the QC controversy
>lets give our guys battle rifles for 600m+ engagements, even though every conflict we're seeing today tells us that that's a job for artillery/drones, and infantry aren't gonna be shooting shit over 300m range
>okay, now lets give the gun a 13 inch barrel so it can't even make the distance we designed it for
>give it a can as standard issue, to make this problem even worse

I'll probably make a few cracks about how it's our turn to make fun of the yanks for having a shit rifle, but I do hope it gets canned, and they stick with the M4/M16 for the foreseeable. Or adopt the M27 forcewide.

>>63898014
Our SF guys are already turning their noses up at the regular MCXs, no way we're going SIG. Our state/corporate corruption is reserved for the motor industry.

>>63901504
>Again, the Spear shoots 6 FUCKING MOA
So you're telling me that the XM-7 meets the minimum accuracy specs that most factory new M-14s failed to meet?

>>63884762 (OP)
Depends if they start shitting the bed before or after """certain people""" finally manage to work out what a fucking intermediate cartridge is. Something COTS until that one's sorted out.

>>63903064
I don't think the MARS is unremarkable

>>63901504
>the Spear shoots 6 FUCKING MOA
>Sauce: hearsay

>>63907757
Good morning, sir!

>>63892234
This is objectively the best answer in the thread.
The amount of burger fuckery and the helpless seething of europoors in the face of it would blot out the sun.
And it’d probably still be a better working assault rifle than what we’re getting.

>>63908954
As a gun owning and also military euro I wouldn't even care. At least some common thinking would prevail

>>63910012
NATO was meant to bring some common thought about, but it should have been considered that multiple countries from multiple cultures couldn’t always agree.
In the surface, the Warsaw Pact did this better but in reality, AKs from different countries are so different that they aren’t interchangeable. I’ll never forget my efforts to put wood on an AMD65.

bump