L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Post by **Dunehunter** » 2011-01-08 16:11

And in Project Reality reality is key

I am seeing a serious lack of sources here. More throwing around of "facts" without anything to back them up will result in infractions.

EW_SK · Post by **EW_SK** » 2011-01-08 16:13

[R-DEV]Rudd wrote:lets be honest supa, the l85 is the kind of thing only its mother can love.

Well i love the L85 , i think it is my favorite rifle in PR atm , the sound is cool , i like it's design (i miss a lil bit the old version ) and i think it's one of the most accurate i could be wrong but
if i had to take one weapon ,the L85 will be my choice

blues&royalsdylan · Post by **blues&royalsdylan** » 2011-01-08 16:17

EW_SK wrote:Well i love the L85 , i think it is my favorite rifle in PR atm , the sound is cool , i like it's design (i miss a lil bit the old version ) and i think it's one of the most accurate i could be wrong but
if i had to take one weapon ,the L85 will be my choice

All 5.56mm rounds have the same deviance and etc.

The ACOG hasn't been announced as an official replacement for SUSAT, but neither has anything else.

In contemporary terms, it's current issue. But that Elcan scope looks lovely to use.

Psyko · Post by **Psyko** » 2011-01-08 17:08

[R-DEV]Dunehunter wrote:And in Project Reality reality is key

I am seeing a serious lack of sources here. More throwing around of "facts" without anything to back them up will result in infractions.

In fairness, most of us are here because we want a break from spammy uninteresting games. Would you watch a **** TV show just because their consistency was good? no. because a good show is usually down to how its written and directed.

same with games. they need to be well written and well directed. multipal site varients would be better than just one version. otherwise it gets boring. and its not like they havnt been modeled already.

besides hypothetically, if all the Acogs got busted and the brits couldnt afford new ones what do you think they would do? they'd go into the back of the old storage rooms and try to find some old SUSATS lol.

Bruxy · Post by **Bruxy** » 2011-01-08 22:08

Source? I sit about a hundred yards away from the bloke charged with implementing the FIST STA package and I was responsible for making sure it was accurately reflected in VBS2.

Beyond that, I guess you'll just have to take my word for it as a random guy on the Internet!

foxtwofive · Post by **foxtwofive** » 2011-01-08 22:29

Wakain wrote: you don't modernise an ak74 with a little RIS either, right? (poles and czechs don't need to reply)

Poles use Beryl 5.56

edit: the picture of prove

Gaz · Post by **Gaz** » 2011-01-08 22:53

Bruxy wrote:Source? I sit about a hundred yards away from the bloke charged with implementing the FIST STA package and I was responsible for making sure it was accurately reflected in VBS2.

Beyond that, I guess you'll just have to take my word for it as a random guy on the Internet!

But there's 7 solid walls between you both, and he doesn't talk to you because you're one of those weird computer game geeks

The DR is the latest officially mentioned ELCAN sight unit that has been mentioned in any public press. The ACOG has been a UOR replacement for SUSAT for the past 2+ years for teeth arms and attached personnel on ops.

To answer the OP's question, read the last sentance, which is why they are in PR. For those complaining about the RIS handrail addition, the green plastic handgrip of old may well have looked traditional to those who look at pictures of it, but it was **** to try and fit additions that would improve it's ability as a weapon, in a 24hr operational environment. Basically it was **** for those who used it.

Bruxy · Post by **Bruxy** » 2011-01-08 23:08

Only one wall, and he loves me because I'm better than him. It's not hard - he's ginger and a Gunner

Stealthgato · Post by **Stealthgato** » 2011-01-09 01:59

[R-DEV]Ninja2dan wrote:
Personally, I hated the SUSAT. But then again, I hated the L85's too. In fact, I dislike all bullpup rifles, with the minor exception being the AUG and that was border-line. In my many years of firearms experience, the ONLY bullpup weapon that I have ever really liked was the P90. Maybe I'm biased from being raised on regular rifles..

But... The AUG is beautiful

At least the AUG A1 with the Swarovski scope is, the A3 is a bit ugly with all those rails over it.

*UNSTF Drummond · Post by *UNSTF Drummond » 2011-01-09 02:15

Noeme wrote:Cocky now are we Drummond ?

As always mate

As far as I can make out ACOG's are not standard issue (yet!) and I have seen many ideas in these forums shot down because of kit not being standard issue to infantry, so would it not of been better to keep the SUSAT as the main scope and have the ACOG as an alt scope from a crate? I loved using the SUSAT in game now it just feels like every other BLUFOR fraction (except for Russians etc but give it time

) , variety is a good thing guys

Is there a source stating that British regulars are being issued ACOG's as standard issue kit?

gazzthompson · Post by **gazzthompson** » 2011-01-09 02:23

*UNSTF Drummond wrote:As always mate

As far as I can make out ACOG's are not standard issue (yet!) and I have seen many ideas in these forums shot down because of kit not being standard issue to infantry, so would it not of been better to keep the SUSAT as the main scope and have the ACOG as an alt scope from a crate? I loved using the SUSAT in game now it just feels like every other BLUFOR fraction (except for Russians etc but give it time ) , variety is a good thing guys

Is there a source stating that British regulars are being issued ACOG's as standard issue kit?

[R-DEV]Gaz :

" The ACOG has been a UOR replacement for SUSAT for the past 2+ years for teeth arms and attached personnel on ops. "

Is currently serving. I made a thread in 2008 after seeing a video of paras with ACOGS:

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f22-mi ... acogs.html

You will be very hard pressed to find a picture or video of a currently deployed soldiers in afghanistan without an ACOG (though not impossible)

Gaz · Post by **Gaz** » 2011-01-09 02:38

*UNSTF Drummond wrote: Is there a source stating that British regulars are being issued ACOG's as standard issue kit?

The R-DEV team cover the UK's Infantry, Armoured, Royal Marine and Air Force (lol) teeth arms. Pretty much all the bases covered where all roles concerning any role in PR is concerned.

Any teeth arms whose role is on the ground, as portrayed in a PR scenario, would be carrying an L85A2 with ACOG optics, 'as is' at this time. You think we make this up for shits and giggles?

There are no personnel in AFG currently that carry a SUSAT sight unit on their main weapon system.

*UNSTF Drummond · Post by *UNSTF Drummond » 2011-01-09 02:45

so gazzthompson link only proves the Paras be using them and the only other source is a dev! Plus the British army in PR are not just in the middle east, they are in eastern europe as well

[R-DEV]Dunehunter wrote: I am seeing a serious lack of sources here. More throwing around of "facts" without anything to back them up will result in infractions.

*UNSTF Drummond · Post by *UNSTF Drummond » 2011-01-09 02:52

Still waiting on your source

Edit nice to see you deleting your posts!

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2011-01-09 03:00

*UNSTF Drummond wrote:Still waiting on your source

And we are waiting on yours, but for safety's sake, not holding our breaths.

*UNSTF Drummond · Post by *UNSTF Drummond » 2011-01-09 03:14

Christ man this is not suppose to be insulting I would genuinely like to see some source info but if your going to be a complete **** about it forget it, and at the same time maybe you should remember, dev or not your just some guy one the net you could be anyone so don't start with this face palm shit

[R-DEV]Eddie Baker wrote:And we are waiting on yours, but for safety's sake, not holding our breaths.

I gave no facts so why would I add a source?

Post by **Rudd** » 2011-01-09 03:17

Drum, Gaz has earned his respect online as part of the PR team, and IRL serving his country. Sort yourself out, you are in the DEV's house, and teh DEVs vet military advisors.

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2011-01-09 03:20

Royal Military Police
http://www.defenceimagedatabase.mod.uk/ ... 4ED2C5ED0F

1SCOTS
http://www.defenceimagedatabase.mod.uk/ ... 4ED2C5ED0F

1 Duke of Lancaster's
http://www.defenceimagedatabase.mod.uk/ ... 4ED2C5ED0F

http://www.defenceimagedatabase.mod.uk/ ... 4ED2C5ED0F

1 RGR
http://www.defenceimagedatabase.mod.uk/ ... 4ED2C5ED0F

40 Commando, Royal Marines
http://www.defenceimagedatabase.mod.uk/ ... 4ED2C5ED0F

ZephyrDark · Post by **ZephyrDark** » 2011-01-09 03:29

Eddie, those links are broken it appears. I've clicked on all of them and theres no image, just a blank white screen.

Post by **Thermis** » 2011-01-09 03:29

*UNSTF Drummond wrote:Christ man this is not suppose to be insulting I would genuinely like to see some source info but if your going to be a complete **** about it forget it, and at the same time maybe you should remember, dev or not your just some guy one the net you could be anyone so don't start with this face palm shit

The PR team has multiple advisor who have real world experience with the military forces that are portrayed in PR. Anyone that comes onto these forums and claims to be a military vet or have military experience is well looked into. We don't just give people credit for serving that they didn't earn. Gaz is the real deal, we've got proof, if thats not good enough for you then I suggest you spend your time elsewhere on the internet.

L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Re: L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Re: L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Re: L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Re: L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Re: L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Re: L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Re: L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Re: L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Re: L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Re: L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Re: L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Re: L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Re: L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Re: L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Re: L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Re: L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Re: L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Re: L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?

Re: L85 - why ACOG instead of SUSAT?